Procrastinating on December 16, 2016

Should-Read: The more this goes on, the more this looks like Brexiters and Trumpists share an essence: they are all seeking to grab whatever they can while the getting is good, while trying to figure out a way to avoid responsibility and blame for whatever disasters Brexit and Trumpism bring--and there will be disasters. But there will be more disasters if nobody is actually at the tiller. And nobody appears to be--either in Westminster or in Washington:

Philip Stephens: How Brexit May Not Mean Brexit: "Referendums... become a device for demagogues and dictators: the people have spoken so now they must be silent ever more...

...[In] liberal democracy... citizens are offered a chance to change their minds.... Rhe House of Commons [has] backed by a large margin the government’s plan to begin the process of departure before the end of March 2017 by invoking Article 50.... The leavers, you might imagine, would be brimming with seasonal good cheer.... They should be dancing in the streets. Instead, gripped by a fear that verges on paranoia, they see dark plots and dastardly conspiracies in every doorway.... The judges... may decide... that parliament should have a say before Mrs May posts her Article 50 letter to Donald Tusk.... The possibility of such scrutiny has provoked uproar among more excitable Brexiters, with the judges condemned as “enemies of the people”. In the manner of authoritarians through the ages, they contend that the rule of law belongs to politicians rather than the courts. This is confusing at best for those who took at face value the leavers’ claim to be the champions of parliamentary “sovereignty” against the depredations of Brussels. Mrs May’s contention that she can decide without consultation with MPs is calculated, after all, to subtract from this very same sovereignty....

What disturbs the leavers is that parliament may take the opportunity to express a view on the relationship Britain should have with the EU once it departs. The referendum answered a simple “in or out” question, saying nothing about what next.... Horror of horrors, confronted with the full complexity and costs of Brexit, [people] might have second thoughts about leaving. The failure of Mrs May’s government to come up with anything resembling a plan points to the scale of those costs. The prime minister has an overriding political priority: to complete the legal process of Brexit before the 2020 election: “You voted for it, I delivered.” But she also has to keep the Tory party together and forestall a disorderly Brexit and economic recession. If the prime minister has a strategy equal to the task she has not shared it....

The first of Mrs May’s demands — a tailor-made deal — is unlikely to survive.... Angela Merkel... has been clear... [that] former members cannot be given deals unavailable to those in the club.... The Brexiters face another harsh truth. For all their bluster... there is no doubt which side would suffer most from a breakdown in the relationship. The EU would lose business in an important market. British-based companies would face new barriers across 27 states.... The clear probability is that Britain will indeed leave... but... the people might just change their minds. There resides the real source of the Brexiters’ neuroses. It has nothing to do with plots or conspiracies. It is called, simply, democracy.

Comments