Brexit 2019 and Poland

I see. The lawyers on both sides are rubbing their hands with glee at all this malarkey. I'm out of it for the forseeable future Milo. I decided to buy another property here in Tri-City and not go back to the UK yet, until normal service is resumed.

The supreme court is about to find against Johnson for lying to the Queen as to why he wanted to suspend parliament. A mirror image of the Polish disrespect for constitutional law.. Nobody seems to care when the government breaks the law.

The English Supreme Court has ruled that Johnson's suspension of parliament was unlawful - and there's a perfect example of why you need an independent judiciary. Poland take note.

Absolutely ! Boris paying for his arrogance

Vote of No Confidence Now!!!!!!

Actually, Johnson must resign. His credibility is in ruins.

And if he doesn't, what's the deadline for that vote of no confidence?

And actually didn't the Queen prorogue parliament? Is the supreme court claiming she broke the law?

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to overrule Brexit...

No. They're declaring the prorogation null and void ie parliament was never prorogued because the Queen gave the order having been deliberately misled by her advisors, the Privy Council, as to the purpose of prorogation.

That won't happen as not enough MP's will allow Corbyn to become PM.
Bojo won't resign.
The people who took this action do not want a No Deal Brexit yet by doing this they have just made that more likely.
If they manage to stop a No Deal Brexit then this mess just goes on ad infinitum.
Meanwhile the public's faith in Parliament and democracy is fading fast..........

My prediction still holds: A variety of elite interests are working together to prevent Brexit. I do think that they'll be successful and the long term results of their success will not be good for the UK or the EU...

You may well be right, time will tell.

By elite interests you mean people who are educated and good at their job ?

The chair of the Supreme Court went to state school and worked her way though college as a bartender.

Boris de pfeffel or whatever his full name is went to Eton and Oxford and was then gifted a series of media jobs,

He won't last until the end of the month as he has no majority. Whatever the rights and wrongs of this then it proves once again he is a liar and liars can not generally get people to work with them. I expect the sensible members of his govt to start resigning over the next few days, following his own brother and Rudd.

Whatever happens there will be no Brexit on 31st October. I can't see Corbin becoming LM but there are plenty of other candidate for an interim.

Financial people, city of london, bankers etc

Aren't they citizen as well allowed to have their opinion and fighting for what they believe is the best for the country? Or os it only allowed to people below menagers position?

It's the UK parliament that has prevented Brexit by voting 'no' to the deal that was negotiated by their representative, with their knowledge over a period of two and a half years. If parliament had voted for the withdrawal agreement there would have been a Brexit with a deal by the end of this month.

True.
But that deal was worse than remaining.
In fact, to call it a deal is insulting.
Total surrender would be a more appropriate term.

How have "financial people" overturned Brexit ?. I'm one and have never been invited to any of the secret meetings about how to achieve that.

They haven't and Brexit has not been overturned yet anyway.
Two faced Politicians are the real problem.

But any deal is going to be worse than remaining. So what do you expect ?

Mays deal was the only one possible that fit her red lines - leaving the customs union, no hard border and leaving the EU courts jurisdiction.

I thought May's deal tied us into the customs union.......

No it did not. After the transition period Britain would exit.

I now predict about another 40 posts while someone explains the Irish border to you and Mafketis again.

Except we had no control over that and in theory could be stuck in the customs union forever.


I understand it perfectly well.

Yes - but May set out contradictory red lines. Presumably you voted for her in the 2017 election so you voted for that too.

what deal did you expect that would be better than remain ? what deal would you support ?

All I wanted was what we had when we first joined The EU.
In other words a free trade agreement.

There are two ideologies working here, various names have been used, here I'll use (drastically simplifying and exaggerating a bit)

1 liquid capital - this is the world of borderless money that cannot be tied down to any county, the ideology (in its purest form) requires total subservience to economic ideology and is against any manifestation of national governments that try to place restrictions on the flow of money, this leads to immense stratification (between and within countries) and alienation of the elite from the citizenry who are ultimately regarded as a burden ("useless eaters")

2 nation state - the idea that some things are more important than economic balance sheets and economic figures and that money should not be able to flow anywhere and everywhere that those who acquire it desire, it starts from the premise that governments are supposed to represent the citizenry first and foremost and that it is immoral (pour example) for the UK government to welcome rich Russian oligarchs who are, without exception, murderous thugs and thieves

The whole remain campaign seemed based entirely on the ideology of liquid capital which leaves non-elites (and those with no aspirations to be financial elites) emotionally cold which is a contributing factor to its loss. For most people, the nation state is the better bet as its thanks to the nation state that we have things like public education and some publicly funded healthcare etc (which the forces of liquid capital are busy dismantling as fast as they can). If Brexit is overturned I would expect even faster and stronger dismantling of institutions that are intended to serve the public.

It's an economic variation of the globalization vs nationalism dynamic (or 'diversity vs solidarity') that forms the largest ideological divide in the western world today.

It's interesting just how powerless the UK, as a nation state, has been against liquid capital in the post Brexit referendum world....

But leaving the EU means leaving a free trade agreement - the best one going. Why do you think they would give Britain the benefits of that without the obligations ? What did you expect ?

Maf - is it obvious that the nation state delivers better benefits ? There are plenty that do not - fancy living in Serbia, Moldova or as an extreme Somalia ? All nation states sitting in the UN. You have lived in Poland in the time of capital restrictions, currency restrictions, price setting, an undeveloped capital market, public ownership of major assets. What do you think was the better time for its citizens ? Pre 2004 or post 2004 ?

But could you point to some concrete action that your "liquid capital" has taken to overturn Brexit - some court ruling ? Some parliamentary procedure ? Some electoral interference ?

Or are you rather talking about people doing sensible things to protect their interest like not opening new factories and selling sterling ?

Because that is what we had before.
Anyway, there were some obligations then but not as many as have been imposed since in this quest for ever greater union.
The old EEC was fairly good it was when it became The EC and later The EU that the problems began.

historically for most people - yeah, Somalia is a failed nation state and Serbia and Moldova aren't much better...


Representatives of liquid capital (aka neoliberalism) are involved in a longterm (partly unconscious) plan to make Brexit so complicated and painful that people will be relieved when it's over. All large organizations have bumblers around who are kept on because they can be counted on to fail at any task given them. It's one way organizations deal with unwanted tasks, put a bumbler in charge and then "Well, we tried, we put one of best people on it, but we just couldn't get it to work... I'm afraid we're gonna have to pull the plug".

I'm not convinced about BJ yet but Terea May's job was to fail to lead to Brexit and she succeeded brilliantly.


I'm a fanatical supporter of the EU up to around ten years ago, when their mission switched from improving the lives of citizens to maintaining neoliberalism, which has strengths and can lead to rapid economic progress but we're well past the point of diminishing returns (Poland's not there yet but will be in a few years).

Take public schools, the police force and public healthcare... how does the quality of each of these in England compare with 10 years ago?

What was available 40 years ago is not available now. In any case that was not a full free trade agreement - the single market started in 1992 and Britain was an enthusiastic member who pushed it hard,

It is perfectly possible to be a nation state with a string welfare stars and be part of the EU - Holland, Germany, Sweden, Austria etc all have very developed care for their citizens and restrictions on capitalism.

As for your conspiracy theory about May it is nonsense - she was elected first by Tory MPs in a crowded field after making promises to deliver Br3xit - she was seen as being the most reliable and experienced choice by 200 very educated MPs.

She was then elected (narrowly) by the country - so 13 million people, including Miloslaw thought she could do the job.

Your view is that a series of bankers decided over cigars and brandy to put her in charge ?

I was asking about England (world capital of globalization at the moment).... how have nation state services been faring there over the last 10 years?


Look at the results... can you look at the UK parliament and honestly say: "Yes, this body is trying to deliver the expressed will of the electorate!" ? If not then what are they delivering.

May was a remainer, why put her in charge of brexit unless you want it to fail?

Brexit failed because of the Irish border and any PM would have been faced with the same problem as May. Johnson is in exactly the same position now, unable to achieve a deal because of the border.