EU - ROADS TO TRAVEL
Some seven come to mind.
1. Remain. No change. No turning. Just stay in the EU as is. It will mean a general election and probably voting again in more referenda until we get it right.
2. Leave. But stay in the full customs union obeying all the regulations but with no say in making them. Then start arranging a piecemeal series of dismemberments. Lots of fun fighting over the details.
.
3. Leave. But stay in the customs union only for goods. No common market for services. No more rights of EU citizens to reside or work in UK. And in order to abide by the Good Friday Agreement, an open border with the Irish Republic for goods and visitors. Perhaps a maximum for visitors of 6 months residence per calender year, otherwise registration and official permission required.
4. Leave. But betray the DUP and put a customs border down the middle of the Irish sea. Great Britain will leave the customs union but Northern Ireland while staying in the UK will be bound by the regulations of the customs union for goods and for visitors.
5. Leave. But so that the Government of the Irish Republic and the EU establishment sell out on the Good Friday Agreement. In this way the UK completely leaves the customs union without retaliation on tariffs from EU and Ireland. However with border posts all along the partition line. Will dissident republicans or the new moderate Sinn Féin retaliate?
6. Leave. But the Republic of Ireland leaves the EU as well and establishes a customs union with the UK. So harmony on the partition line.
7. Leave. But the UK and the EU turn bloody-minded. A tariff and visitor deal is established on the same basis as North Korea. Economic turmoil. Helicopter gunships patrol the border. Governments fall. Populist parties take control. Capitalism in crisis.
What other roads are there? Which one are we going to take? When will we sleep safe in our beds again?
I wish there was more discussion on Libcom about Brexit.
I fear the possibility of a 2nd referendum with a 2nd vote to leave.
That I think would massively embolden the far right, cause more political chaos and might result in a very right wing fascistic government coming to power in the UK.
Well of course 'We' the working class as a collective entity, rather than the abstract 'people' and their 'representatives', aren't really making the decisions that will matter to us in practice.
There has been some previous discussion but maybe not in line with the Uk 'Left' versus 'Right' political advisors to our ruling class. See here for instance:
www.afed.org.uk/their-brexit-our-lives-and-our-planet
https://www.anarchistcommunism.org/2018/12/21/euromania-intensifies
https://libcom.org/blog/bosses-political-faction-fights-not-our-problem-17122018
https://libcom.org/blog/peoples-assembly-election-carnival and very briefly here:
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2018/no-1372-december-2018/brexit-schmexit/
That AF article feels a bit all over the place, like:
"Grass-roots democracy within an electoral system clearly doesn’t work, if a referendum result can be so easily thrown in the dustbin. The response to there even being another referendum, never mind the outcome, shows working class people what the elite really think of us.
But this realisation isn’t fostering working class unity, when the class is so divided over questions of labour, migration and national autonomy along the lines of Left and Right. A major problem with both Brexit and Remain positions is that they are producing cross-class alliances... And these include some of the left too, hoping for a socialist Brexit; through the looking class again. Other left-wing workers and unions are agreeing with industry bosses, who in general oppose Brexit. A second referendum just demonstrates to many that democracy is a joke."
Yep, with them so far, but then:
"On the other hand, a ‘People’s Vote’ is the only avenue that gives working people any agency at all during the current deliberations. And there is certainly an anarchist case for voting just as there was first time around, especially if it includes the possibility of remaining. A Remain vote, not a soft Brexit, is less of a threat to our internationalism."
So, is the message to choose the better, more progressive cross-class alliance? I'm not a total abstentionist, I'd vote in something like the Irish abortion referendum, but I do think anarchists, and particularly anarchist organisations aiming to offer a degree of clarity, should refuse to take sides in things like Brexit where the entire debate is just over how the state and capital should be managed. I'm not denying that there might be a reformist/humanitarian case for voting, and I wouldn't judge anyone for doing so on those grounds, but I can't see how there could be an anarchist case for voting to preserve the European Union.
R Totale
Not that I am in favour of a 2nd referendum, but I don't see why allowing one would be anti-democratic.
It's really pretty stupid that we only get one chance to vote on a major issue, and no matter how close the vote is, whatever side wins settles it forever. Especially so when new information comes to light after the referendum, like how much chaos it actually is to leave and how the leave side manipulated voters.
Agree with R Totale above about the content of that AF individuals article. The AF it seems in this case is far from pursuing a clear collective policy., but remember that before the first referendum there was an extensive debate in the libcom threads with not a few anarchists arguing for a vote against Brexit (and therefor for the European Union) on a variety of, at best, confused grounds. Doubtless the same splits would emerge again if there is another referendum.
Scallywag
I am so fucking glad there isn't. This is the typical bullshit they give us a 'choice' over. War on the brown people? Nope. War on the poor people? Nope. Shitty customs union? Yep. And when the workers choose the wrong option (out), they (deliberately?) screw the whole thing up so the right option (in) begins the only feasible alternative.
Scallywag: Basically no. The second referendum has been ruled out by oor Terry. So it's a for sure and certain. The previous result was a narrow out. For two years, we've been bombarded by jolly japes about the post-Brexit dark age, Brexit mongers like BJ (and isn't he just so like a mouthful of spunk) have been told to button their gob holes, and the left has embraced the EU (or neo-liberalism as we cynical old fuckers call it), so the next one is an in.
I didn't mean debate as to whether to leave or stay, I meant discussion as in what to make about Brexit and what it's implications will be.
I am not sure why you said a second referendum has been rulled out for sure and certain, but then said a second referendum would result in a vote to remain in the EU.
I think that bit was a joke - saying that if May had ruled something out, then that means it's certain to happen.
I'm less convinced by their claim that a second referendum would result in a win for remain: if anyone hasn't been paying attention, there's been really quite a lot of evidence that the centrist, pro-maintaining-the-current-conditions faction of capital have lost their hegemonic grip over a large and decisive section of the population, and I don't think that's reversed at all over the past two years. Certainly, there's been a lot of scare stories in the media about the potential results of Brexit in that time, but there's also been plenty of Tommy Robinson facebook live videos and minion memes about why it'd be the best thing ever, and who's to say which one carries more weight by now?
Anyway, in terms of potential consequences, I guess one thing to bear in mind is that there's a constituency out there (dunno how big exactly, but sizeable), who've arrived at a point where anything other than a hard Brexit will be treated as a "stab in the back" myth. Not saying that we should deliberately hope for a hard Brexit to appease said people, but I think it is worth considering when attempting to weigh up the pros and cons of various potential outcomes.
What do people think about the proposals in the immigration White Paper?
There's a proposal that 'low skilled' EU migrants would be put on 11 month work visas with no right to bring their families over. The definition of 'low skilled' officially is that you only need school leaving qualifications, but the immigration White Paper is defining 'low skilled' as people earning under 30,000 a year which obviously excludes most people.
Britain's loss will be Germany's/France's gain.
Fingers Malone
A lot of these will not only affect potential immigrants but also EU nationals who are already here. If the current Brexit deal goes through, all EU nationals in the UK will need to re-apply for settled status, which requires documentation of having been in the country for x amount of time - documentation that people have not previously needed. Therefore there's a reasonable chance that large numbers of existing residents will lose their status and become undocumented, making them considerably easier to exploit and criminalising them.
The 11 months work visa stuff also looks set to create both a tier of 'illegal immigrants' and people whose immigration status is tied very strictly to employment even for new migrants. All of this is combined means hundreds of thousands or millions of workers who can be very easily sacked/evicted and subject to deportation.
Meanwhile you have Angela Nagle, Eddie Dempsey of the RMT and others arguing that immigrants bring wages down (and hence borders should be enforced more strongly), completely ignoring the material consequences of immigration control on people's ability to organise.
I think way too many people assume existing migrants will have no problems reapplying for settled status and are really underestimating the amount of paperwork required, and the fact that poorer people, who are more likely to have moved a lot and lived in rented places without contracts, are the people most likely to fall foul of these requirements.
I also think, Wojtek, that moving to France or Germany is not that easy for people on low wages and that it should be borne in mind that a lot of migrants are not so footloose and fancy free, they have children at school in the UK.
fingers malone
Yeah, just to chime in here: I think there are far too many people seeing this simply as a vote 'for or against' the EU. It obviously is also that on an abstract level but, as fingers points out, what's ignored in that configuring the question like that is how it will affect the migrant section of the class in Britain: essentially, what's being voted on is, 'Do you want neoliberal capitalism with a harsh border regime, or do you want neoliberal capitalism with an even harsher border regime?'
To working-class people in Britain with their immigration status either sorted or unquestionable, the difference is basically negligible. To the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of working-class people whose immigration status is not so secure, its potentially life-changing. Reducing it to simply 'for or against' the EU or neoliberalism doesn't cut it as an analysis imo.
As for where the far-right fit into it all, they obviously stand to gain regardless of what happens. Anything short of a hard Brexit/no deal, they get to play off the 'Brexit betrayal' narrative that's been doing the rounds these past 2+ years. And if they get the Brexit they want, well, they've got exactly what they want (though I doubt they'll say that's they had in mind, if they get it).
Ok. ''A vote for or against the EU'' for some or for or against the Uk for others depending I suppose. As I said the same arguments as before would come up again if there was a second referendum. So Ed what are you saying - should anarchists and communists then vote to stay in the EU, vote for a poor deal or what?? Of course existing or potential immigrants to the Uk or to other parts of the EU now or in the future will not benefit overall from either result, but some immigrants in the UK and the EU might be less worse off as long as there is some kind of at least transitional deal. - which to be honest I think I and others assumed would be forthcoming but could be wrong it seems now.. The original referendum inevitably gave rise to huge divisions and a series of long lasting cross class alliances and campaigns that have only been of benefit to capitalism if not the specific immediate needs of key capitalist interest the Uk. Anarchist and communists are not significant players in determining the outcome of all this but we don't want to add to those divisions by joining in the same cross class alliances do we?
Edit: I forgot that Ed did vote to remain in the last Referendum - one of the few anarchists that owned up to the fact on this site. I appreciate that it was precisely the perceived likely bad impact on immigrants into the UK (above all other issues) that caused some anarchists to make that decision. I don't berate such good intentions just the logic behind abandoning an otherwise time tested principle.
Two quick points: one is that, for the sake of accuracy, it's worth distinguishing between "the migrants section of the class", and "the EU migrant section of the class" - for non-EU migrants, who are already at the worse end of a two-tier system, things are unlikely to get any worse, and they might even have some hope that things could potentially get better. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that because I think we should cheer on the end of free movement for EU migrants in the UK, but I think it's worth trying to understand the motivations of, say, Leave voters from South Asian backgrounds (can't find a good breakdown of the actual vote, but I think this and this are relevant).
I guess the question is, is taking up an explicitly pro-Remain stance the best way to fight Fortress Britain, or can we imagine other ways to do so? IMO, the "defend all migrants" demo just after the referendum struck the right tone, and while you can criticise it (in particular, I've heard that it misrepresents the actual position taken by Another Europe is Possible, which is a pretty big thing to get wrong), I definitely have some sympathy to the argument put forward in the "leave or remain, we all hate Tommy" article - although admittedly, that's about how best to beat the far-right, rather than beating the border regime as a whole.
Ed
If some version of a harder brexit deal goes through, they'll still have the EU as an external enemy which is constantly betraying the UK to point to, as well as continued attempts to reconfigure the UK immigration system to work on, so yeah there really is a gain for them in almost any direction and a lot of people who should (or possibly do) know better keep pandering.
And PS: In relation to the perhaps initially unlikely but now energetically argued 'No Deal' 'crash out' possibility there is this alternative approach from the South Essex Heckler and friends mentioned here:
https://nothingiseverlost.wordpress.com/2019/01/17/answering-our-rulers-crisis-with-mutual-aid-and-solidarity/
The thing is, the EU migrant section of the class and the non-EU migrant section of the class can also be the same people, in my job you have to be on a low income to access classes. and 53% of the students with EU passports are not born in the EU. In the 'nationality' section of the form EU nationalities come in at number 2, 3, and 5 (Spain, Portugal and Poland) but in the 'country of birth' section there are no EU countries in the top five. These students are mostly from Latin America and Africa.
People with EU documents but who were born in non EU countries are likely to be the poorer migrants and more likely to work in low paid jobs and have housing problems, and then later have problems regarding being able to produce all the tenancy agreements for everywhere they have lived in the UK, either because they lived somewhere without a contract due to housing need, or they moved several times and at one point lost paperwork. So any harsh deal regarding settlement procedures will be worse for exactly these people.
Regarding R Totale's point about South Asian people voting leave, nearly everyone I know in the UK who is from Colombia, Ecuador, Congo or Senegal has family in the EU (Spain for the first two, France for the second) and so they are anxious about ease of travel and family members coming to live here in the future. I think in South Asian communities this would be a lot less common so this would be a factor perhaps, but those issues for migrant communities in the UK shouldn't be brushed aside just because there are other large BME communities that don't share those issues.
Spikymike
I think we can be very clear doing the following:
Pointing out the cross-class alliances of the lexiters like the RMT leadership, Novara/New Statesman's Grace Blakeley, the FBU's Paul Embery, who are pitting the EU as 'financial capital' vs. a British 'productive capital', trying to sell pro-business stuff like state aid as some kind of 'democratic socialist' magic bullet for the UK economy etc. etc.
Really two-faced shit from lexiters talking about 'fortress Europe' as compared to free movement within Europe - except that that UK will continue to fund fortress Europe after exit (May committed to this months ago).
Similar with a slightly wider group than the above like Paul Mason, who combines wishing for a harsher border regime within the EU (no workers earning under median wage etc. nearly got that with the immigration bill going through now) with support for NATO.
Everyone that claims that the EU is 'neoliberal' and by extension the UK ruling class is somehow not, or that far right nationalist populism is not just another face of 'neoliberalism'.
All of these groups try to pass off their various variations of nationalist shit as 'marxist' of course, see QQ's blog debunking some of this: http://libcom.org/blog/over-supply-labour-depressing-wages-30102018
Being clear about the material impact of Brexit on the migrant working class, and how the fate of the migrant working class is tied into the fate of people with more secure status. NHS up-front charging and similar tend to be piloted with immigrants first, hundreds of thousands of existing workers moving to a more insecure status will very easily depress wages and conditions, situations like lecturers being told they'll be deported if they miss more than a week's work during the lecturers strike.
None of this requires some kind of pro-Remain or pro-EEA cross-class campaign.
Fingers - those are good points, and I totally hadn't thought of some of them. And I think the majority of South Asians did support remain anyway, I just think it's worth remembering how complex and contradictory the social bloc that voted Leave was/is.
I still feel that the old anarchist/direct action critique of electoralism holds true, that there's things we can do to show solidarity with migrants and fight the border regime that don't require us to wait for a particular day to vote, and that we can keep on doing after the polls close, but I'm sure everyone on this thread is aware of that already.
Oh, and one other point that's worth making is just how much money the Home Office can wring out of people, even EU migrants whose documentation is perfectly in order - for someone who qualifies for permanent residence, just getting the card is £65 and then a further £19.20 to have their biometric identification taken, which is a lot to someone on a tight budget but still cheap by the standards of Home Office fees. The new EU settlement scheme will be £65 as well, but if you qualify for citizenship and want to get naturalised then that's £1330.
Oops, nevermind that bit, literally immediately before I posted it Theresa May apparently said she's scrapping the £65 fee, can't imagine they'll be getting rid of the citizenship fee anytime soon though.
R Totale
It's quite possible things will get worse, the immigration bill slated to go through last week had clauses that affect non-EU migrants too. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46613900
There was also this report that visa restriction for Bangladeshi chefs (one of the big leave campaign pitches to non-EU migrant communities was stuff like this) hasn't changed at all, and employers associations that had supported Brexit now regretting it: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-curry-industry-brexit-staff-shortages-bangladesh-catering-association-a8677911.html - this is of course not the non-EU working class but the non-EU petit-bourgeois - however while people talk about South Asian leave voters I'm not sure I've seen a class breakdown at all so quite possible a lot of the leave votes were leveraged through small business associations promised that a £30k annual business expense would drop.
Totally agree with most of what has been said. The problem with Brexit is the huge number of people who will directly lose out. EU workers in the UK who risk losing homes, jobs, could be forced to leave and at the very least will be scrabbling around for documents and trying to find extremely high fees and lose access to healthcare, schools etc. Citizenship was 975 last time I looked, can't believe it costs even more now.
I comletely agree with fingers about accomodation, it is very hard to prove when you are renting, especially if you are subletting or flatsharing, Also proving work history isn't always easy, if you are living in a precarious situations keeping hold of years' worth of pay slips etc is not easy at all.
And then there are British people in the EU, who are now running all the same risks. I have found out that my job is safe, for now, but I am going to get a resident's permit all the same.
In the UK a family of four would be looking to find at least 4 grand, plus time off work to go to meetings etc, plus chasing up documents from power companies, phone companies, employers that may not even exist any more, costing money to call them from a landline (or more if you only have a mobile) . And if that leads to you losing your home then you might also lose your job, your kids schools, you lose access to healthcare and council services.
I'm no fan of the EU, but Brexit is going to cause a lot of harm to a lot of people and the only reasons in favour of it are racism (more or less overt) and ridiculous belief in some mythical Great Britain.
jef costello wrote that people had two reasons for voting leave – racism and a belief in some mythical Great Britain. Surely for some people (including this writer) there was a third reason. As the Anarchist Manifesto Ireland says:
"* The EU is the multi-nationals’ ideal world. Constantly manipulated by them to their self interest; constantly smoothing the way for them and channeling through their profits.
* Fortunately there is an anti EU bandwagon is on the roll. A strange lot of bedfellows admittedly, a mixture of the right and left, some of them indeed rather dangerous. Interesting times – ride the tiger."
Despite its having survived some three centuries and currently being on a roll, I still think a political system rewarding just 1% of the people (with another 5% of well-bribed collaborators) is a precarious system.
So the racists and the romantics want to help us to weaken the multi-nationals. Well the more people pushing the better. We need all the help we can get to topple the system. No problem with the romantics. The racism is worrying though. But in this case I don’t think it’s dangerous.
There might well be a case where it would be right to support the bourgeoisie in order to defeat racists. However not here and now with Brexit.
Given the original headline title and the relationship between the EU and it's still competing member states, with the UK in or out, there is still the continuing crisis of the Euro as outlined in these short articles;
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2019/01/01/20-years-of-the-euro-part-one-has-it-been-a-success/
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2019/01/02/the-euro-part-two-will-it-survive-another-20-years/
The intellectuals chip in
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/25/fight-europe-wreckers-patriots-nationalist
Yet no mention of the reality of Fortress Europe
Maclane Horton
That's the thing though, it's an inter-ruling-class fight, so voting leave is still supporting one section of the bourgeoisie against the other. This is the bit that I get stuck on with both left/anarcho leave and left/anarcho remain arguments, they're both great at pointing out the problems with the cross-class alliance on the other side, but then kind of skim over the issue of the cross-class alliance on theirs.
Maclane Horton
Yes there is also a misguided notion of national sovereignty and the idea that the ''local'' bosses are somehow better than the ''non-local'' bosses. Hardly something anarchists should be cheering for either, but outside of the left its at best a side issue in terms of brexit lets be honest. The main reason is anti-immigration views being prevalent among the over 40's who made up the majority of brexit voters,
jef costello
It cost us £1300 plus £150 for an English test, £60 for the life in UK test and another £100 odd of admin fees, so about £1500-£1600 in all. This has now increased of course, and will continue to do so as the service has just been privatised since brexit.. You used to be able to use the registry office but as of 2019 you now need to go to a private company and pay a few hundred quid for a ''premium service'' just to scan your documents.
R Totale
I take your point but for me it all rings a bit hollow, I mean for millions of migrant workers in the Uk who don't have citizenship a ''critique of electoralism'' is somewhat of a moot point. They simply don't have the right to vote in national elections or the eu referendum in the first place . Of course ironically the electoraiists (i.e the labour left et al) didn't and won't ever campaign for them to have the vote. .
Maclane Horton
Read this when it was first posted and tbh I'm still absolutely baffled that someone could look at the current rise of the far-right across the world, the rise in racist attacks in Britain since the 2016 referendum, the way immigration remains one of, if not the central issues around which all political debates revolve, and conclude that racism is not dangerous in the current climate.
Maclane Horton
There was a rise in racist attacks after the referendum which lasted the whole summer. I don't think it should be dismissed as not dangerous.
I agree with jeff and can'tdo about the costs of getting settled status, which is not just one fee but includes phone calls and time off work etc. plus a lot of worry and stress for people.
I've seen people talking about how people having more insecure status puts them in a weaker position with employers, but I haven't seen people talking about how it also puts people in a weaker position with regard to domestic violence and abuse, and this is already a massive problem and is going to get a lot worse if large numbers of EU migrants are made more precarious, and I'm concerned that this is being ignored.
An old friend of mine came over from Poland in the back of a van in the very early 2000s before they joined the EU. He worked cash in hand etc. and as far as I know evaded immigration enforcement, but a big problem he had was that he could never leave the country (until Poland eventually joined the EU, he stuck it out until then). So things like being able to leave a relationship and stay with family, then return to the UK on your own terms later, get very difficult. Or a converse version is the retaliatory report to immigration enforcement (very extreme version https://metro.co.uk/2011/02/01/immigration-officer-puts-wife-on-terror-list-gets-sacked-635281/).
I should explain my post a bit maybe, one situation is when a person's status depends on their marriage, a spouse visa, this can make them very vulnerable. Other people are not on spouse visas but lack of English and lack of support networks here in the UK make them vulnerable. If people are worried that they may be deported they will be afraid to seek help from any state agencies. Also people trying to leave a violent relationship and having to regularise their visa situation at the same time will have loads of practical problems like not being able to produce paperwork if the abusive partner has kept it.
Death rates from domestic violence are currently rising so this is something to take seriously.
The people talking about cross class alliances and stuff, what do you think about these issues of increased vulnerability for migrants? Because I feel like people* are basically ignoring it, but if that's not what's going on, please tell me what you do think.
[edit] when I say people are basically ignoring it, I'm referring to a few years worth of arguments in lots of different places, I'm not accusing specific people on this thread of ignoring it. I'm saying in my overall experience when people make left leave arguments they tend to a) say the increased vulnerability isn't really happening b) say 'what about non-EU migrants' c) talk about migrants bringing wages down d) just talk over me altogether.
Maybe I'm cynical, but I think expecting the issue of foreigners' welfare to be central to the Brexit debate is naive.
Mate I'm writing on an anarchist/ libertarian communist website, I expect it to be important here.
Anarchists publicly arguing either for or against in the Referendum last time or in any new one were/are effectively joining one or other of the cross class campaigns in my opinion, even if they take the pro EU side on some understandable concerns about the assumed bad impact of Brexit' on the condition of some migrants in the UK or the EU. I'm just repeating what I have said previously in the much longer discussions last time round. Having said that I don't think the voting one way or the other by a few anarchist individuals who are part of a tiny ineffectual political movement to be significant and don't intend to fall out with such individuals on this one issue alone.
Edit: cross-post with Spikeymike
fingers malone
Yeah, I think this is a really important question as, it seems to me, while I agree with the danger of cross-class alliances, my feeling is that in this case, it remains on the level of an abstract principle (albeit a really important one), which I'm not sure how to apply in this instance.
For example, does anyone here disagree with my earlier characterisation of Leave vs Remain as two neoliberalisms, one with a harsher approach to migration than the other (which has a harsh approach to migration already)?
If so, then how else could it be characterised? (I'm obviously discounting 'Lexit' as an absolute fucking joke tbh so aiming it more at ultra-left types).
If not, what would 'avoiding cross-class alliances' look like in this instance as an actually workable alternative to that cross-class alliance, given the current balance of class forces? Sure, there is lots of excellent organising around anti-raids, migration, etc going on, but we're talking about activist groups in the dozens/low-to-mid hundreds. Perhaps Brexit would shock a movement into being, but it seems a lot to stake the ability of hundreds of thousands/millions of people to remain in the country on. All this is made more complicated by the context of a rising global far-right who, ultimately, are the best positioned to benefit from Brexit (not just in Britain but internationally, imo).
I suppose another way of characterising it is that Spikeymike is essentially right in the question he's asking of 'ultra-left Remoaners' like me; however, my issue is that I think cross-class alliances come about when a class movement is not strong enough to resist them and, at the moment, I see no class movement in Britain able to offer a solution to the 100,000s/millions whose residence in this country is potentially at risk. Maybe I'm wrong; but what solution is there, then, for all those people, which doesn't involve a cross-class alliance?
I'm involved in different groups which do migrant solidarity work from different angles (housing groups, workplace groups) and none of them are cross-class imo, also all of them involve both EU citizens and non EU citizens, none of them are EU exclusive and I don't think I'd want to organise on that basis. As Ed says all these groups are in the dozens/low hundreds and they are very overstretched. If Brexit imposes worse conditions on many of the members this will mean more work and more stress and make it harder for the groups to function, and make it harder for example for cleaners unions to organise and win victories.
Quote from Ed which sums up my position pretty well too.
For example, does anyone here disagree with my earlier characterisation of Leave vs Remain as two neoliberalisms, one with a harsher approach to migration than the other (which has a harsh approach to migration already)?
So we have this organising going on, which is good and effective but very stretched and very small, and then these legal changes may well come in and make everything much worse and make it much more difficult to organise, and my comrades response is what? Genuinely I don't really understand it.
Spikymike
This is a spurious argument I think. Voicing an opinion in a referendum debate is not the same as 'joining a cross class campaign'. Or even if it is, what about people who put forward arguments in the recent abortion referendum in NI. Do you think people voicing an opinion here were joining a "cross class campaign"?
Hey I campaigned against Job Seekers Allowance when it came in and now Universal Credit is replacing it and that's even worse, if I campaign against Universal Credit am I now some kind of 'pro JSA campaigner'?
Ed
Lots of interesting stuff to think about on this thread and I don't think I can give an adequate response on my phone, but this gets what I think is the main question, which is what can we actually do about any of it.
I'd kind of turn it around and ask what is it that "we" can achieve by joining in a cross-class/electoral/non-class-and-direct-action based response. Cos yeah, I agree that the current state of w/c direct action responses around housing, anti-raids and so on isn't adequate to the size of the problem, but if the alternative is like... hope that a second referendum happens, hope they let EU migrants vote, hope that remain wins, or even actively campaign for it, then that all seems like radically more inadequate? So if there's no solution that doesn't involve a cross-class alliance, I'm also not really clear what a solution that does involve one would be, and even less how we could actually contribute to it.
Trying to think of more positive solutions to put forward: I swear I can remember something about the Home Office suspending immigration enforcement in Glasgow at some point, but I totally can't find anything about it now. Does anyone else remember anything about that?
darren p, Could have been better worded. I'm meaning anarchists involved in organised collective public activity with a view to influencing others to act in a particular way. Not referring to off-hand comments by individuals in a pub argument. Organised political activity needs to be consistent and individuals need to standby their collective decisions., but then some of the contributions to this, as in earlier discussions, are just individual self-justifications not intended to be acted upon by anyone else. Ed and Joseph previously were upfront about their own pro-EU voting intentions as I was about my 'spoilt ballot' approach but there seemed to be a lot more unsaid pro-EU views underlying some of the other contributions.
I don't know everyone irl who is posting on here but to my knowledge none of the 'pro-Remain' people did anything like campaign in the referendum, some of us voted in it, including me, my personal position was that I didn't tell anyone what to do and I said I would be voting remain if anyone asked me and that was it, and on that basis I got a whole load of shit off people when I was very upset and worried about my friends, that's how I remember that discussion going.
I'm not campaigning for a second referendum or anything like that, I'm not involved 'politically' in the Brexit situation, what I'm doing is things like helping people with info about how to get their status sorted out. Apart from that I'm doing the aforementioned solidarity work around housing and stuff.
Do you think I'm telling the truth about the domestic violence stuff? If you do what do you think about it?
Spikymike
OK, yes I agree there is a difference between the two here.
Spikymike
I think there's a difference between being "pro-EU" and anti-Brexit though. Agree?
Spikymike
This is a problem of framing though. The vote wasn't on whether or not to dissolve the EU, but whether the UK should leave the EU. After the UK leaves the EU it will still be funding Fortress Europe, collaborating on defence, have some kind of official economic relationship with the EU (whatever that is, unless there's no-deal WTO terms brexit), looks likely to be paying in billions of pounds as an exit fee, might continue to make regular payments as part of customs union or EEA membership etc.
A large number of people who voted leave are anti-EU, and a large number of people who voted Remain are pro-EU, and the leave/remain campaigns were in large part around this, but not only. To actually put forward a class perspective on this also needs to recognise what the impacts of a changed economic and political framework might be (and this would also need to include what the 'remain and reform' people are likely to do to attack migrants too).
I disagree with Ed that lexit is just a joke. While it's obviously a complete fucking fantasy, it's a fantasy that has quite a bit of institutional support from Novara to the New Statesman, to the RMT and FBU. This has led to people arguing for everything from support for more migration controls, to the EU being a barrier to renationalisation the railways or whatever else.
The New Statesman has just employed Grace Blakeley (also a Novara contributor) who's still a lexiter, and has a book coming out on finance capital with Repeater books.
Eddie Dempsey, a senior figure in the RMT is, calling for a no deal brexit. Of there's of course Angela Nagle's article against 'open borders', Angela Nagle can count among her defenders articles in the the Paul Mattick jr. edited Brooklyn Rail.
Bastani before he did an about face a couple of weeks before the vote was on a lexit promotional video alongside people like Galloway and Kate Hoey.
Here's David Broder doing an interview with Yanis Varoufakis:
https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2018/11/03/diem25s-radical-europeanist-political-ag
And David Broder praising Melenchon: https://jacobinmag.com/2018/09/france-insoumise-melenchon-sixth-republic-labour
Broder is not explicitly a lexiter that I can find, but Melenchon is pretty pro-frexit.
David Broder in case people don't remember: a few years ago writing for the commune after its split with the AFedit - the commune did not split with the AF, was thinking of when a few people left to set up a platformist group in 2008, which was not the commune): https://libcom.org/library/earth-not-flat-review-against-nationalism.
So these arguments might be marginal overall, but they're being pushed by people only one or two steps removed from us. People who would have considered themselves internationalist communists 5 maybe 10 years ago. Is it having an impact on 'Brexit'? Probably not much, but it definitely has an impact/reflects the slide towards the Labour party and nationalism from anarchists/autonomists the past few years.
On the other hand I very rarely if ever see people campaigning for a second referendum or promoting the 48%/people's vote stuff etc. even a lot of remainer left liberal/Labour types find that shit excrutiating.
darren, You can argue that being anti-Brexit doesn't mean you are automatically pro-EU in terms of what's going on in your head, but not so obviously in term of the voting practice and the arguments put forward to support that voting practice in the current situation. For us in the UK opposition to British, English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish nationalism have always been high on our agenda as anarchist and communist internationalists but that should not create any bias towards alternative cross-national but capitalist institutions. We are not here to sort out the capitalist's state and administrative problems. Leave that to the politicians of the Left and Right.
Spikymike
Surely that depends which arguments are being put forward, no?
Spikymike
But who are you including in this "us" and "we"? Almost everything I've read from various "revolutionary" groups (The Aufheben article is the only one I can remember offhand that took a different outlook) on this issue seems to be written solely from the perspective of UK citizens living in the UK. They completely ignore the potentially far-reaching and negative life-changing effects this could have on EU citizens living in the UK and UK citizens in the EU, and their friends and families. It isn't just a matter of trade agreements....
Mike Harman
The Communue didn't split with the AF. Maybe you mean something else?
fingers malone
OK, I think we might be talking past each other a bit here - if you're not doing anything of the things that I'm saying would be a bad idea, then I don't think we disagree with each other.
I'm honestly not trying to be flippant or dismissive, so please don't take this the wrong way. My vague, inadequate starting point would be that harmful legal changes should be resisted and disrupted at the point of implementation as far as possible, and so hopefully make life a bit better at the local level with the aim of making the policy unworkable at the national level, but like I say, that's obviously not really an answer in itself - I have vague suggestions to make, but I don't have "the answer" to how Brexit will affect migrants any more than I have "the answer" to Universal Credit or legal aid cuts or housing benefit being a mess. Like, I think what Ed said about our current weakness is true, and given that's our starting point, it's really hard to offer constructive solutions that aren't just fantasy stuff like "first, take the militant mass movement that you prepared earlier..."
Trying to offer vaguely plausible solutions, I heard someone mention in an interview that the LA teachers' strike had included schools not co-operating with immigration enforcement as part of their demands - I can't find much about it online, but this mentions them including anti-deportation stuff as part of a previous round of bargaining, and there's a Jacobin piece about them here if you don't mind Jacobin stuff too much. I think it'd be good if we had more stuff like that here, but then that might just be me saying "I'd like it if we had a different and better union movement".
Also, on the question of whether there's more lexit-y or left-remain-y stuff around, I guess it's inevitable that people on here are arguing in response to stuff that's been said elsewhere to an extent. My guess would be that there's more lexit stuff in the Formal Political Left, but you're way more likely to find dodgy pro-EU stuff verging on open bigotry in general social circles of broadly left-leaning people, although obviously that massively depends on what your social circles are.
Thanks for replying, sorry I get upset.
Some examples of what you're talking about, Against Borders for Children did a lot of work around the govt collecting data from children at schools including their place of birth, that could be used for immigration enforcement, and they got the survey scrapped.
There's been various attempts in workplaces to resist immigration enforcement, there is currently a campaign around NHS charges for migrants. Problems are i) workers are not doing loads of collective action generally, so this impacts on people taking collective action against immigration controls. ii) the govt tries to build in technical strategies that make it difficult for people to resist immigration controls iii) lots of people are not sympathetic to migrants or 'people who don't follow the rules'.
R Totale
Yeah this is fair enough
rat
I think I got mixed up with the platformist split around the same time (which I can't remember the name of but contained someone with a particularly bad trajectory since). Will edit that out.
(Getting off topic, but I think maybe you meant Liberty & Solidarity?)
Maclane Horton
Whoever wrote that last part sounds like they have little at stake. It's not a fun jaunt, it's real life. I am currently trying to sort my immigration status, I probably won't be deported and I will probably keep my job, but it is a tough time and I have it relatively easy.
And how do you think Brexit is going to damage the system? Once we have a fisheries department freed from the yoke of Brussels do you think workers will automatically throw off their chains?
Wanting Brexit and wanting to weaken multinationals are far from being the same thing, this is why we don't use this "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" logic (if you want further illustration just look at US foreign policy for the last 60 years to get you started.)
Romantics? You mean people who haven't thought things through and are not realistic? I think you'll find that is the Brexit lobby, although to be fair they are mostly outright liars.
And I can't stress enough how much time and money this will cost normal people, as well as the sheer stress and worry.
fingers malone
So much this! We resist bad changes, regardless of whether we like the current system. We defend our living and working conditions which means something that will makes milliions of lives harder is not to be supported. I didn't vote and honestly now wonder if I should have.
Ed
If all this is true about the tiny influence of the tiny social group of radicals being discussed, I’m wondering what people are really arguing about here? If every one of these politicos was to join one or other side it would make little, if any, difference to the larger outcome. (As others have said, personal choice and public campaign are distinct; Novara, Broder and similar are a different case and whether someone voted or not won’t determine whether or not they follow their shameless path into the political slimelight.) So is it anything more than an argument about morality, principled consistent positions, not polluting the purity of particular political traditions etc? I’m not saying those things have no validity but it’s not like we’re arguing about a life & death struggle for the soul of a mass revolutionary working class organisation or movement (unless you ludicrously believe Corbyn’s Labour is that). There is no wieldable mass constituency that has to make a significant choice to put its considerable weight behind one side or the other. And if there was then the question would be able to be posed very differently, with far more options for such collective power than supporting one side or the other.
The consequences for migrants are very real, and whatever the outcome of the final deal for migrants Brexit has already poisoned the atmosphere for many migrants who feel less welcome and less secure. It has also revealed rising levels of racism, including among the working class, and made political debate more toxic & aggressive at every level of society, from the pub to parliament. It seems to have ‘politicised’ people more than any other issue – but in the worst, most nationalistic, way. But the ability of the tiny ‘pro-rev/radical’ constituency to influence things directly via brexit is minimal to non-existent – unless they were to accommodate themselves to active alliances with political parties/campaigns with worse immigration policies than those the radicals are trying to promote/defend. Positions of principle are fine and necessary, but one has to recognise when there is no material basis to be able to practice them. That shouldn’t lead to unprincipled acts but it does reduce real principles to a level of frustrating abstraction.
rat
Yes I did. That one slid into Jacobin left nationalism and the other into Red London left nationalism tripped me up.
Lots of Labour supporters are very angry (and some either surprised or feigning it) that Labour first was going to official abstain on, then very late yesterday imposed a one line whip against the 2nd reading of the Immigration Bill. It gives the government sweeping powers to change immigration rules post-Brexit (and affects non-EU migrants too).
Result was that the 2nd reading passed, by less votes than Labour no-shows. The no shows included 'luxury communist'/labour left favourites such as Emma Dent Coad, Clive Lewis, Keir Starmer, Naz Shah as well as most of the Blairite remainers like Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall.
I keep thinking about that bit in 'Left Wing Communism an Infantile Disorder' where Lenin tells Sylvia Pankhurst she should support Labour once electorally so that the working class can watch them betray everyone and go on to revolution. And how that's been used by generations of Leninists to support labour, get 'betrayed', support it again, then again, then again.
Mike Harman
Leninists, one more Labour betrayal if you want to be revolutionaries!
Novara's take from 53 minutes:
https://youtu.be/ibz5tHy7OpQ
OK a bit more sectariania, it's somewhat of a diversion, but I think it's relevant to the milieu that 'lexit' support comes from, which is a weird convergence of ex-anarchists and Stalinists.
The Commune originated from Red Star
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Star_(UK)
And Red Star itself originated from AWL (and some other places). You can see David Broder writing about leaving the AWL here: https://shirazsocialist.wordpress.com/2008/08/23/the-awl-israel-and-iran/
https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/685/david-broder-no-platformed/
This was all around 2007-10:
Then Socialist Fight in 2017 documents Broder's conversion to Stalinism: https://socialistfight.com/2017/10/27/david-broder-the-renegade-from-trotskyism-has-become-a-stalinist/ - that (incredibly long and boring) blog post also mentions tankie Alex Gordon of the RMT.
yeah i wish lexit was a joke, sadly though as fantasist as the ''the EU won't let us renationalise the busses'' stuff is, its hard to get away from the fact that the reason the UK is leaving the EU is in large part because neither the tories nor the labour left campaigned to follow the scottish referendum model and didn't give the vote to millions of non-citizens or 16-18 year olds in the eu referendum thus inevitably tipping the vote in favour of the white british and older population
https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-per-cent-voter-turnout-electoral-register-charts-7399226
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36619342
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/british-population/demographics/age-groups/latest
Personally therefore i think this is partly driven by a demographic backlash,and that the radical left or ultra left are not immune from such social trends and neither are the labour/reformist left. Hence, imo the origin of some of the more dubious lexiteer arguements people have highlighted on here.
I know there's problems with a ''clash of generations'' type thesis as it veers away from a class analysis and that its not the only reason behind brexit, but equally its a very odd thing to ignore when discussing the issue as some do.
This is an interesting development: https://www.facebook.com/Spoons-Workers-Against-Brexit-2267527593490704/
Which, in some ways, reminds me of this story (was frustratingly hard to find anything other than the Sun and Breitbart reporting on it): https://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/community/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=74144
https://discoversociety.org/2019/02/06/focus-brexit-and-rethinking-the-british-in-europe/
Leaving this here for want of anywhere better: https://facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2535897316482778&id=458048964267634
Christ, the IWCA puts out some right dodgy stuff nowadays. Not got the time for a full analysis now, but apart from the utter fantasist claim that Labour have a no borders policy(!), the thing that really disappoints me is that it's class politics without the working class, it's all politicians and economists with the working class just being vaguely evoked as this mass to speak for, but never really directly engaged with. Ultimately, not that far from the mainstream/centrist/Labour politics they so despise.
Apart from positively quoting George W Bush's speech writer (wtf?!), the main thing I'm always curious about which side pro-border leftists would take on stuff like the attacks on Immigration Enforcement officers in Shadwell and Deptford (or the Stansted 15, for that matter). Do they support the Immigration Enforcement Officers? Or the working-class people resisting deportations?
Not really the most important issue to come out of Brexit, but does anyone have any takes on the spat between lexit Stalinist Eddie Dempsey and remainer trot Michael Chessum? On the one hand, Dempsey seems like a thoroughly nasty piece of work, and the whole Full Brexit thing of "proper working-class politics, oh also we were set up by an actual Lord" is pretty ludicrous, but on the other, people are complaining about him saying "the one thing that unites [Tommy Robinson supporters], whatever other bigotry is going on, is their hatred of the liberal left and they are right to hate them", which seems to be presented as this super-shocking thing but feels not that unreasonable to me? Like, are we not allowed to hate liberals now?
I think the main thing is that it's bollocks though, no? Like, it seems pretty obvious that if you were gonna choose 'one thing' that unites Tommy Robinson supporters, it would be hatred of Muslims.
This seems (to me, anyway, could be wrong) to be part of Dempsey's strategy of socialist nationalism so he's minimising the reactionary nature of Tommy Robinson supporters ('they primarily hate the liberal left') while also claiming some of their reactionary views 'for the left' (i.e. border controls, Lexit etc).
Should also point out he had a go at Chessum/Another Europe is Possible for having pockets 'full of Soros money', which is obviously the classic anti-Semitic dog whistle; he didn't say they have pockets 'full of Joseph Rowntree Foundation money', for instance, coz that wouldn't have the same political effect. Not to mention the distinction he makes between 'the working class' and 'ethnic minorities'.
Dempsey's obviously not a racist or anti-Semite himself, but I feel like all this is more an attempt to harness right-wing buzzwords and slogans 'for the left'.
Yeah, I think that's mainly fair enough, I was just a bit taken aback by the way some people were reacting to it, which seemed to be less what you said above and more "you can't say that it's good to hate the liberal left!"
On the bit about "the distinction he makes between 'the working class' and 'ethnic minorities'", I think we'd probably mostly agree with that critique of Labour strategy which sees it as attempting to forge a top-down alliance with certain people who are seen as "community representatives", and so solidifying rather than challenging internal hierarchies within those communities on the lines of class, gender, and so on, along the lines of Crossaints and Roses and all that, so I think if you want to be charitable you can read his argument as being something along those lines - poorly expressed, maybe, but then people don't always express their ideas while speaking as neatly as they do when writing. But on the other hand, if people don't feel like being charitable to him, cos he does definitely seem to have some pretty rotten tendencies, then that's understandable too. In some ways I guess it's a question of whether people have any more sympathy for Chessum's side or if it's just a case of a plague on both their houses.
The 'liberal' in 'liberal left' can mean very different things, it can mean liberal in the way people use it on libcom, but it can also mean being supportive of LGBT rights and feminism and migrants, and this is an important ambiguity here.
It's not a question of having more sympathy for 'Chessum's side', Eddie Dempsey says that Angela Nagle is right about 'nonsense abstract no borders demands being left cover for right wing politics'. I'm not having more sympathy for Chessum (I mean, I don't know him or anything, so I have nothing really for or against him) I'm having more sympathy for the people suffering from border violence. I got called neoliberal by someone in another union in my local area for arguing with him about no borders, and I'm pretty sure that both Dempsey and that guy earn plenty more than I do, I also know I'm not any kind of liberal except the 'LGBT is fine by me' meaning of liberal.
If I'm speaking harshly I apologise but I've been upset about this for days. This reactionary strain of the left is really strong, there is a guy called Paul Embury in the FBU who is so reactionary it's unreal, he says children should be brought up by straight couples, he is against choice in the question of abortion, he is against single mothers, he is of course massively against migrants. And there are plenty like him and like Dempsey.
Dempsey has not only argued that border controls are a good way to increase wages, but also that Marx argued this which is extremely disingenous - and why people should assume that when he says 'liberal' he means 'anyone left of Stalin'. QQ did a response to some of this lot here, although it sort of needs a part II (for Marx's letter on Irish immigration and similar) https://libcom.org/blog/over-supply-labour-depressing-wages-30102018
Also as pointed out already in the thread, he's one of the 'no borders gives cover to neo-liberals' Nagle-ites - saying this just a couple of days before ur-neoliberal Hillary Clinton called for Europe to close its borders which was amusing. https://twitter.com/libcomorg/status/1065615807902818307
There is mutual appreciation between Dempsey and Paul Embery (despite Embery writing regularly for Spiked! - whose pockets are apparently full of Koch brothers money).
Chessum is as far as I know a full time employee for 'Another Europe', which is explicitly pro-Remain and reform, and for a second referendum.
While I am very anti-lexit (just fucking stupid nationalism), I am not pro-remain, there are versions of Brexit which may not change the status of EU migrants for the worse, and there are versions of remain which might. Or in other words the Remain campaign was also extremely anti-immigration it just promised to control it within the framework of the EU - big reason why Leave won the referendum I think was that the Remain campaign repeated the messaging.
I agree that 'left liberal' here means 'left people who are against border controls, homophobia and transphobia'. Dempsey is a fan of the phrase 'radlibs' which is a tankie term for anyone to the left of them, not actual 'radical liberals' like Monbiot or Naomi Klein.
Not so much related to the EU, but related to Dempsey and the RMT - turns out Dempsey wrote a eulogy for 'anti-fascist' (in fact, far right Putin supporter) Alexei Mozgovoi, having attended a tour of 'Novorossiya'. Also looks to be friendly with Galloway on twitter.
https://russia -insider.com/en/ukraine-man-who-led-ghost-brigade/ri7518
The Romanian Wave: The Documentary
Romanians work right across the UK economy. So why do they get such a bad press?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csz36x
3 million have emigrated, the highest behind Syria.
Ed
Yeah it's bollocks and it also massively plays into far-right talking points quite a lot.
If we look at James Delingpole in Breitbart:
https://www.breitbart. com/politics/2018/10/21/more-muslim-rape-gangs-convicted-more-weasel-excuses-from-the-left/ Britain’s Liberal Elite Still in Denial About Muslim Rape Gangs
This is extremely reminiscent of older far-right conspiracy theories about Jews/communists encouraging immigration to destroy the west. A lot of 'anti-liberalism' ends up being about this in the end, and people should be a lot more careful than they are bandying it about.
Pulled together a quick(ish) blog post, mostly about how much of a dick Dempsey is, here: http://libcom.org/blog/three-impossible-things-breakfast-some-comments-full-brexit-group-06042019
BURC
There are four ongoing debates in the great Brexit controversy – in a nutshell:
BACKSTOP
UNION
REFERENDUM
CANCELLATION
IRISH BACKSTOP: Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland stay in the EU customs union. Britain negotiates a separate deal on tariffs and customs. There a border for residence, jobs and goods down the middle of the Irish Sea.
CUSTOMS UNION: Whole of the UK stays in a customs union while leaving for immigration and services.
SECOND REFERENDUM: Vote again and see what happens.
FIFTY CANCELLATION: Revoke article 50. UK stays in EU.
These are the publicly debated issues. A fifth issue is discussed behind closed doors. This is to bribe or blackmail the Irish Government and the EU officers into betraying the Good Friday agreement and accepting a hard border between North and South.
Personally I would go for the Irish Backstop. It frees Britain from the multi-national control exercised through the EU. And it holds out the prospect of a united Ireland that could also break free from the EU. Dublin could then do something about its ridiculously unbalanced leprechaun economy.
Maclane Horton
Weird take. Britain won't somehow magically float free of the control of the world economy if it leaves the EU. There's no freedom in the economy. But anyhow why should we be concerened with trading arangments between capitalist blocks? Left nationalism is as much of a problem as right nationalism.
Brexit is of concern only to the extent that it takes the form of an assault on labour, in this case migrant labour in particular.
There are instances of the EU-court standing over the national labor courts in EU-countries, like Sweden, where actions of the trade union movement in defense of EU-migrant workers(i.e allowing them to work under the same collective barging agreement-conditions as the workers movement has struggled for) was not condemned by the Swedish labor court, but it was condemned by the EU-court because it "hinders the free movement of capital" and the EU-court stands above the Swedish labor court.
So in some aspects I would agree that leaving the EU would in general create less international barriers for the trade union movements.
George Galloway has just endorsed Nigel Farage's Brexit party. Farage also recently appeared on the Spiked! Online podcast with Brendan O'Neill. Along with recent outbursts from Eddie Dempsey and Paul Embery the reactionary social democrat / tankie set are getting a bit more explicit about exactly how reactionary they are.
Mike Harman
Looks like James Heartfield can be added to the list too
Yep Claire Fox, James Heartfield are both RCP old guard now standing as MEP candidates for the Brexit Party.
Alka Sehgal Cuthbert also a Brexit Party candidate and has been writing for Spiked since 2014 (so probably not actual RCP cadre).
Seems half the Brexit Party are RCP or connected to Spiked:
https://medium.com/@SJHolloway/this-is-everything-i-discovered-about-all-of-the-brexit-party-mep-candidates-2a59f8f850c5
Anarchist statement on today's Euro elections in the UK;
https://www.anarchistcommunism.org/2019/05/21/euro-elections-an-aimless-mess/
Some thoughts on the Europe-wide election developments might be useful at this point.
And in France this:
https://libcom.org/news/gilets-jaunes-national-call-sunday-may-26th-street-during-elections-23052019
So I missed this interesting video discussion earlier (and before the latest EU elections) aimed at a USA audience but useful to us here in the UK - especially the contribution from Chris Gilligan:
https://www.marxisthumanistinitiative.org/us-s-news/video-mhi-public-meeting-on-brexit-and-the-future-of-ireland-and-scotland-beyond-the-pro-anti-brexit-quagmire
Find under the 'Our publication' section.
Spikymike
Working link below:
https://www.marxisthumanistinitiative.org/u-s-news/video-mhi-public-meeting-on-brexit-and-the-future-of-ireland-and-scotland-beyond-the-pro-anti-brexit-quagmire.html
A left communist commentary on the European elections in the UK and Italy - looking both back and forwards. Reference and a link to earlier analysis of the Euro currency crisis is in my post #26.
www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2019-05-27/brexit-or-remain-a-choice-of-tripe-at-the-end-of-may
Some differences with aspects of this approach presented by Chris Gilligan in that video above well worth viewing.
See also: What can Anarchists learn from the EU elections?
AF
One problem here. Bringing it up because the EU border is regularly brought up by lexiters, but it's a red herring IMO. I can't find the article now, but about a year ago, May indicated continued UK contributions to policing the med (there are navy vessels there now) post-Brexit. So the UK could very well continue to contribute just as much as it does now.
On the other hand, there are all kinds of remain and soft-remain anti-immigration lines, like reforming free movement, using the 'emergency break' (which Paul Mason is a massive fan of) - existing stuff like deportations of EU migrants who are street homeless and etc.
Mike Harman
Not sure it makes sense to call it a red herring - certainly May's version of Brexit would mean continued involvement in the EU border, but the whole starting point of Lexit is, rightly or wrongly, that the tory vision of Brexit isn't the only one possible. You can disagree with that, but if you grant them that starting point then it follows that an independent UK could have a different relationship to the EU border.
The EU border thing is usually a weak argument because in the case of the Embery/Glasman wing of Lexit, they're no more internationalist than May is, and for anyone who genuinely supports an internationalist/open borders Lexit, that's a bit of a fantasy position on a par with wanting to get the SPGB into power between now and October, but I don't think either of those objections apply to anarchist communists pointing out that both capitalist options are bad and involve continued repression against migrants.
R Totale
Yes I should have made this explicit in the comment. The Embery/Glasman wing bring it up as whataboutism against people who criticise their shitty nationalist/anti-immigrant positions when there's no indication when it comes to it they'd reduce the UK's involvement if they were ever in a position to do so.
In addition to the contribution from Chris Gilligan in the video discussion referenced in the earlier post #89 well worth viewing Chris has also contributed this panel discussion text with more detail in relation to the Irish Border issue here;
www.insurgentnotes.com/2019/06/brexit-immigration-controls-and-the-border-in-ireland
Doing the Two Step
Boris is not in an impossible situation. He can do Brexit, but he will have to do it in two steps
.
Step one: leave the EU, but stay in the single market (customs union) for goods. OK. Not what his right wing wants, but wait for it, you will see, they will get their heart’s desire in “step two.”
So then, for starters it’s out of the EU for everything except goods. No common market for services. No more rights of EU citizens to reside or work in UK. Although, in order to abide by the Good Friday Agreement, an open border with the Irish Republic for goods and visitors will be necessary. Perhaps a maximum for visitors of 6 months residence per calendar year, otherwise registration and official permission would be introduced.
Step two: riding on the wave of popularity Boris calls a general election with the slogan, “A MAJORITY TO FINISH THE JOB.” And he gets his clear majority. And now he has all the time he needs. Britain is not in the EU. No one is looking over his shoulder. Months pass. A long time in politics. Administrations change and options change. A new deal has always been on the table and now Britain would be negotiating from a position of strength. The negotiation may be piecemeal (lots of fun arguing over details) but European business doesn’t want WTO rules and European business will get its way.
So there it is. Of course one isn’t happy doing what Boris wants. But in this case what Boris wants is what we should want. He is nicely getting Britain out of the multi-national power point that is the European Union. A small but very useful step for anti-capitalism. Dance the two step with Boris, but don’t let him know you’re leading.
Maclane Horton
I am not sure your first step is viable and your seconf makes no sense. If the EU will be under pressure from business, then imagine the pressure Johnson will be under. Also quitting the EU will not help anyone, except maybe people who set up commpanies or consultanciees to manage it.
Maclane Horton
lol no
"The European Single Market, Internal Market or Common Market is a single market which seeks to guarantee the free movement of goods, capital, services, and labour – the "four freedoms" – within the European Union (EU)"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Single_Market#Four_freedoms
these are not separable, states cant pick and chose which they what, its all or nothing, the eu has been very clear about that
you cant have an open boarder and a limit to how much people can cross it
Maclane Horton
this is bullshit, its a positive step for fascism, your not leading anything, your trying to justify being lead by the far right
From the frying pan to the fire.
If Brexit was suppose to free us from the strangulation of EU regulatory red tape, then Boris appears intent upon changing our masters to the voracious appetites of the Americans and accept all the lower healthy and safety standards, they will seek to impose in any trading agreement.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49135045
And will the UK survive?
Indyref2 for Scotland according to Sturgeon
The possibility of a united Ireland according to the Irish PM
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/26/brexit-deadlock-as-no-10-insists-eu-must-scrap-backstop-before-talks
radicalgraffiti
This has been at the centre of Labour's 'a customs union' hedge.
It could be EEA membership (four freedoms), but it could also be a Turkey-style deal (free movement for goods, but nothing else including services). However Turkey's arrangement was supposed to be a temporary thing on the way towards EU membership. This is the difference between 'the customs union' and 'a customs union'. I hate that I know this :(
Entangled in Brexit
Confusion over principle. Confusion over tactics. Confusion reigns. I, frankly, don’t see why. Maybe it’s my simple mind.
Boris and his allies want Brexit because it will give them even more opportunity to exploit their workers and consumers. As for me and my allies, hard left brexiteers, few as we are. We see it as an opportunity for anti-capitalist advances. Without the danger of direct interference from the devious hand of that agent of the multinationals the EU.
Now Jeff Costello thinks it makes no sense to leave the official EU, but at the same time stay in the single market until a new deal can be arranged. And the reason he thinks it makes no sense is, he says, because all the movers and shakers in Britain think leaving the single market will not help them.
To my mind this is mistaken. A great many of top management think, as Boris keeps telling them, that they will be better able to exploit us once there is a new deal free of the single market.
However, here and now, inside the EU, Boris just can’t fix the new deal. Why not? For why - because of the bloody-minded attitude of the Irish government and its EU allies. But after Britain officially leaves the EU, except for the single market, and holds fresh elections so Boris can have his own big majority, why then it will be a new ball game.
And time will pass and then under renewed threat of the dread NO DEAL, the tough minded Irish and their EU apparatchiks will start to crumble. Plain sailing ahead for the good ship Boris.
MHorton
Some contradiction here; or is it simply you think workers haven't been sufficiently exploited yet to make them anti-capitalist? And what anti-capitalist advances have been won by large sections of the working class being pro-brexit for the most nationalist & anti-immigration reasons?
And those predictions are the pre-conditions from which anti-capitalism will grow?
Maclane Horton
You read a lot into two sentences. Your understanding of what I said is as shaky as your understanding of brexit.
Maclane Horton
What forces do you see winning those advances? Where are the strong working-class anti-capitalist movements that you see winning major victories in the next few months or so?
In these elections, will you be voting tory to help ensure that Johnson (I don't know why anyone writes as if they were on first-name terms with the arsehole) gets the big majority he needs to help put his/your plan into action? And if not, why not?