Yay, great post LW. I'm going to try to make a semi-substantial answer rather than a snarky one liner.
Regarding Labour: I'm quite amazed at the size of the mess, probably because I had not been paying enough attention to internal Labour politics. I simply don't get what the PLP is hoping to accomplish. Sure Corbyn might cost them the next general election, but this bickering will hardly make things better, and Corbyn did bring a ton of members to the party. With all the prominent Conservative trying very hard not to become Prime Ministers, there was an opportunity for Labour to sounds statesman-like. Instead, we got a bunch of bickering. Is there even someone to take over the party if Corbyn quits?
I find it particularily annoying because whoever is the next Prime Minister will have a huge influence on Britain by renegotating its influence with its entire neighbourhood. You rightly point out that the public won't have the stamina to be still interested in the minutiae of negotiation after a couple years. That's what ane le opposition is important, to keep the government in check. There was a lot of commentary from the left saying in effect "We don't like the EU because it's a neo-liberal nightmare, but exiting now means exiting on the Torie's terms, which is not going to improve". Without Labour to keep the Government in check, the Eurosceptic Left's worst nightmare might come to pass, as they end up in a deal that just keep all the parts of EU membership they don't like.
Thanks god, no one seems to be in a hurry to do anything about leaving, so Labour should have the time to sort itself out at some point. I wonder if we'll see a General Election before article 50 gets triggered. The campaign would be interesting, the Lib Dems and SNP would campaign on Remaining, but what about Labour and the Tories? What about UKIP? It'd be nice to have a debate and a vote on what kind of Brexit people wants.
Speaking of that, I'm quite surprised to see you're backing May. Again, I might be wrong, but to me, taking a slow and steady approach, with a mostly Remain PM will likely end up in what should be your worst nightmare: the Norwegian model of basically still being subject to EU regulation, but without a voice in the system (Actually, it's probably going to be something even closer than the Norwegian model, since the UK is bound to want stuff like ongoing passporting of its financial institutions in the EU). Without the UK in, stuff like the ECB's ongoing effort to have Euro currency swaps move to within the Eurozone rather than the City won't be kept in check.
And even Farage is now willing to have the UK contribute to the EU's budget post-Brexit.I'm pro-EU, but as a good Leftist I must say that this scenario, the UK still de facto anchored to the EU while not having a voice as the City's lobbyist greatly pleases me. But what's in it for you eurosceptics? Shouldn't you wish for a general breakdown or relation that would lead to a real Brexit? Or do you merely see it as a stepping stone, a way to keep disruption to a minimum while you can then work on slowly unmooring the UK from the EU, one treaty at a time?
Edit: I also find it funny that Corbyn is blamed for the Brexit when the proportion of Labour voters that voted Remain (63%) is the same as the proportion of SNP voters that voted Remain (64%). Yet Sturgeon is a genius and Corbyn is bad, for some reasons.
DoubleEdit:
El Faragio resign as UKIP leader! Is there really no one at all to lead any of the Party? I'm expecting the Green to collapse any second now.
Author
Topic: Brexit! Conversation Continued (Read 193119 times)