Looks like May's having to cave on the amendments to the trade bill.

[Monty92]

No, I am not saying that. I am asking whether a parliament that continues to frustrate and betray the will of the people was worth fighting for in the first place.

If we want to leave to protect the sovereignty of parliament, where does it leave us if it becomes clear that we cant trust our own parliament to represent us? You talk frequently of the politicians and bureaucrats as though it is some Brexit conspiracy. THat is just how parliament works. It is what 'the likes of me' having been saying for years. You are fighting for the primacy of a backward, insular, self-preserving political elite that kept your biggest issue off the ballot for 40 years.

It leaves us with the option of punishing them at the ballot box

[Ash]

This was a single issue vote on one question. Possibly the most incomprehensible and complex question in our constitutional history.

Yes, people voted leave. They didnt vote for specific versions of it and we have no idea what they wanted from it (although we can make a guess in certain areas).

They wanted the country to be able to spend its own money, manage its own borders and pass its own laws. You can't do that in the EU and you can't do that with a 'soft' (fake) Brexit.

To suggest that they must understand the mechanics and minutiae of trading protocol and arrangements before they can ask for that is bit orf, tbf. We have a large political class and civil service who are paid to grapple with the details, and the fact that this class is claiming that independence is a technical impossibility shows the true technocratic, democracy-phobic soul at the heart of the EU.

[Ash]

If it was clear that voting Leave meant a hard Brexit what are we having these negotiations for?

Because the ruling class was physically sick when the proles refused to obey their orders, and is doing everything it can to overturn the result of the referendum.

They had no plans for implementing a leave vote before the referendum, and they have had no plans for a no-deal scenario even up this point, over two years after the vote. When you have no plans for something, you have no serious intention of doing it.

[Ash]

No, I am not saying that. I am asking whether a parliament that continues to frustrate and betray the will of the people was worth fighting for in the first place.

If we want to leave to protect the sovereignty of parliament, where does it leave us if it becomes clear that we cant trust our own parliament to represent us? You talk frequently of the politicians and bureaucrats as though it is some Brexit conspiracy. THat is just how parliament works. It is what 'the likes of me' having been saying for years. You are fighting for the primacy of a backward, insular, self-preserving political elite that kept your biggest issue off the ballot for 40 years.

"Better a bad Parliament, than a good King". - Tony Benn

Brexit should be just the first step in re-energising democracy and building a new political landscape, with new political parties and everything up for grabs in terms of ideas. And people like you, my friend, should be on the side of this peaceful, democratic revolution.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Well, if you talk to ordinary people a lot of them will have no clue what any of that means so, in answer to your question, every part.

Those are two things. It is sooo much more complicated than that.

My sis-in-law, with whom we're staying atm, is the only Leave voter I know.

She voted out to "fück 'em all" and to send some more cash to the NHS where her other sister works.

I'm fairly sure she couldn't define sovereignty and it's not about immigration. She's Cornish so:
1. There are no immigrants here so they don't feel swamped in the slightest.
2. Don't matter if they're from Devon, Romania or Timbuk-fücking-tu, they're from the wrong side of the Temar and should all fück back off up country.

All these articles and letters and posts from Leave voters saying "All 17.4m voted for the exact same reasons I did" are getting on my tits.

There were myriad reasons which is why, given the closeness of the vote, there is no national majority for any outcome.

Which, as we all know, is why this country's political establishment is in the clusterfück it currently is.

This is why JRM feels he can push the govt into a hard Brexit. And why Sourbury, Ken Clarke and the Remainers think this then allows them to overturn the vote.

I reckon I've studied pretty much every govt since Walpole and can't think of it every being this fücked.

When Lord North lost the Septics, we had CJ Fox waiting in the wings which then led within a year to Pitt the Younger.

Suez led to Supermac.

Asquith had DLG, Chamberlain had WC, and the Tories twice had the bøllocks to actually split on the principle of free trade.

Today? Fücked.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

The point is that all votes have obscure and unpredictable consequences that not every voter can be expected to understand. That is not a reason not to have the vote, however.

The logical conclusion of your position would be that, because the matter is simply too complex and obscure for voters to understand, they ought never to have been allowed to make a democratic decision on it.

No.

The logic of that position is that we had vote for full time representatives to make these complex decisions for us.

As you know full well. And which you'd fully support were Jezza's MPs to rebel on a manifesto commitment to steal all your money and send you to a gulag. Were that to happen, you'd be praising our representative democracy as you have on here many times in the past.

[Peter]

It leaves us with the option of punishing them at the ballot box

Punishing who? The two main parties?

Who was it who said no matter who you vote for the government always gets in?

[Peter]

They wanted the country to be able to spend its own money, manage its own borders and pass its own laws. You can't do that in the EU and you can't do that with a 'soft' (fake) Brexit.

To suggest that they must understand the mechanics and minutiae of trading protocol and arrangements before they can ask for that is bit orf, tbf. We have a large political class and civil service who are paid to grapple with the details, and the fact that this class is claiming that independence is a technical impossibility shows the true technocratic, democracy-phobic soul at the heart of the EU.

See, there it is. when. Our own politicians refuse to listen to us or are too incompetent or unwilling to do what we ask we blame the EU and its 'democracy-phobic soul'.

Its not them. Its us. It always was.

[Peter]

"Better a bad Parliament, than a good King". - Tony Benn

Brexit should be just the first step in re-energising democracy and building a new political landscape, with new political parties and everything up for grabs in terms of ideas. And people like you, my friend, should be on the side of this peaceful, democratic revolution.

I would be but you know as well as I do that it wont happen. The noble British voters will get their country back and go back to sleep.

You get the government you deserve, and all that.

[Peter]

My sis-in-law, with whom we're staying atm, is the only Leave voter I know.

She voted out to "fück 'em all" and to send some more cash to the NHS where her other sister works.

I'm fairly sure she couldn't define sovereignty and it's not about immigration. She's Cornish so:
1. There are no immigrants here so they don't feel swamped in the slightest.
2. Don't matter if they're from Devon, Romania or Timbuk-fücking-tu, they're from the wrong side of the Temar and should all fück back off up country.

All these articles and letters and posts from Leave voters saying "All 17.4m voted for the exact same reasons I did" are getting on my tits.

There were myriad reasons which is why, given the closeness of the vote, there is no national majority for any outcome.

Which, as we all know, is why this country's political establishment is in the clusterfück it currently is.

This is why JRM feels he can push the govt into a hard Brexit. And why Sourbury, Ken Clarke and the Remainers think this then allows them to overturn the vote.

I reckon I've studied pretty much every govt since Walpole and can't think of it every being this fücked.

When Lord North lost the Septics, we had CJ Fox waiting in the wings which then led within a year to Pitt the Younger.

Suez led to Supermac.

Asquith had DLG, Chamberlain had WC, and the Tories twice had the bøllocks to actually split on the principle of free trade.

Today? Fücked.

Callaghan's government was pretty ****ed