Re: Bad news for Brexit Junkies! - worse news for Labour and remainers
This is all true, you could add that the UK news media delights in spreading lies, it does it purely for the lulz. But... In 2016 only political lunatics had strong opinions one way or another on the EU, and nobody here thought that there would be any significant change whatever the result of the referendum - these two things together practically guaranteed a leave result. In retrospect, the real historic vote in 2016 was the vote for Boaty McBoatface, this was the template for the 2016 referendum, and the 2017 general election. Those people singing 'Oh Jeremy Corbyn' were not a cult (as the Guardian ludicrously claimed), they did it because it wound up all the right people. In the future, all elections will re-elect Boaty McBoatface. -Ariston On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 14:55, James Wallbank wrote: > > (1) The "United Kingdom" is not a nation state as Europe knows it. It's > actually a shrunken, dwarf empire. > > (2) Areas outside the Southeast (both the nations: Wales, Scotland and > Northern Ireland) the Regions (The Midlands, The North, The South West) > and the unrecognised nations (Cornwall, Mercia, Northumbria) are > effectively colonies under occupation by London. London has total, full > spectrum dominance over the national narrative. > > (3) Britain is suffering from a kind of post-imperial psychosis. > > (4) Britain is notable in being the only European nation to have failed > to rid itself of hereditary rulers. Of the 250 or so Dukes in Britain > (that's the highest level of the aristocracy outside royalty) around 180 > of them still own the land that their ancestors owned just after the > Norman Conquest. That represents nearly 1000 years of occupation. They > will stop at NOTHING to retain their hidden power. > > (5) Britain's manifestly defective parliamentary system is really window > dressing, that conceals other centres of power. # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Bad news for Brexit Junkies! - worse news for Labour and remainers
On 16 Oct 2018, at 9:54, James Wallbank wrote: Well, quite clearly I'm beginning to sound like a member of the tinfoil hat brigade - but seriously, the level of democratic failure and delusional thinking at the highest levels of governance are hard to explain in other ways. I agree with your analysis in spirit, but all of those things were true when the UK joined the EU — so it doesn't do do much to explain why this and why now? The nihilistic turn that many established nations are taking is maddening because it's hard to tell whether the driving forces are structural or, instead, if we're seeing the resurgence of the 'great man' model of history (yes, peanut gallery, I know this lot isn't very 'great'). In theory, those two ways of thinking about society are radically different; in practice, they seem to be converging. A handful of people who fancy themselves great have fumbled and maneuvered their way into positions, political and discursive, that allow them to seize — or maybe 'surf' — structural forces. The fact that they're jabbering, sophistical narcissists is all the more frustrating, because anyone with a shred of optimism left would think those personal qualities would make it impossible to rise to such power. And yet we also know that those personal qualities are ideally suited to key aspects of how media works now, again ranging from the structural (for example, the temporal model of 24/7 constant-coverage media machines) to the personal (Rupert Murdoch and his ilk). So what we're seeing isn't just a collapse of the national regimes, we're also seeing the collapse of an epistemic regime that was tied to the heyday of — and depended on — those national regimes to establish facts. People like to cite that chestnut about everyone gets their own opinion but not their own facts, but *in fact* what we're seeing is a rising world in which people *do* get to have their own facts — for a while. The first question is for how long, and second is what comes next? In the US the concern is that the GOP under Trump is assembling a one-party state at an alarming rate. Much of the basic work had already been done before Trump came along, and his forces are now mainly connecting the dots. The result may well be a governmental regime that's adept at manufacturing its own facts on a just-in-time basis — basically shoving crazy short-term noise into media pipelines and networks in order to dominate both *how* things are 'framed' (bleh) and *what* is framed — 'content' (even more bleh). In practice, this relies heavily on subverting the segments of the government whose strength has been that they moved *slowly*: the technocratic and procedural layers of the executive branch, fact-finding mechanisms of the legislative branch, and the analytical authority of the judicial branch. Given the right conjunction — autocratic leaders, solipsistic ruling parties, minority parties in thrall to institutionalism and good manners, and judiciaries systematically subverted over decades — this has been surprisingly to accomplish within individual countries. But this turn involves several (maybe many) countries, which is where it gets really messy. It's hardly worth mentioning the importance of the community of nations to restrain individual countries' excesses, but what happens when these nihilists start to cooperate? We're seeing that all over the place: cabals meeting here, theaters of the absurd there, shadowy influence networks playing next-level jurisdictional games with data, employees, processing. Again, that's not new: for example, the homogenization of politicians and campaigns was clear in the '80s, and the rise of multinational news systems like News Corp heavily shaped the politics of the '90s. But we're only beginning to see how deeply political media consulting has been internationalized, and there's a growing sense of defeat that any existing institutions will be able to establish the facts, let alone determine whether they were criminal, let alone prosecute and the people, organizations, and networks involved. And that's where your analysis, though largely accurate, becomes dangerous. It may help us to understand some of the structural conditions driving nihilistic projects like Brexit, but because it doesn't address my initial questions — why this? and why now? — it doesn't do what's needed: help to lay a basis for new frameworks, institutions, and procedures that are capable of restraining this turn. The dilemma that minority parties face is that they're largely limited to assuring people that the institutions can be renewed through normal civil processes and that we can return to some semblance of sanity. What they can't do is frankly acknowledge the possibility that these institutions are 'broken' or hopelessly inadequate to the challenges. Again, this isn't especially new: we've seen it in proxy wars, flags of convenience, the rise of
Re: Bad news for Brexit Junkies! - worse news for Labour and remainers
Dear Ian, thanks for posting this. I do think there are some carefully choreographed theatrics involved in this depressing circus. And there is a going to be quite a lot of calculation (possibly agreed by both the EU and the UK civil servants) that a dramatic last minute battle that goes down to the wire and from which both sides emerges and are seen to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat will play well with domestic constituencies and may (they calculate) help May get the parliamentary support she so deperately needs. It is this fact that makes it hard to disentangle the real battles and real news from the misinformation and 'phony wars’. But having said all that I am skeptical of the picture painted by JP of the brexit enterprise as some kind of strategic master plan. This attributes a level of strategic skill and competence that is glaringly absent from the moronic fantasists that populate this government (and much of the wider parliament). I am not averse to conspiracy theories but in this case I just don’t buy it. But more seriously it lacks credibility because this ‘civil war’ has been years in the making. The fault lines in both the conservative party and Labor go back nearly half a century. They are generational and have deep historical and cultural roots (you can see it in the studied nostalgia of Johnson’s faux Churchillian strutting) and probably do not need to be re-heated on this list. So I think the enmity between the almost religious fervor of the nativist Brexit true believers and the more straightforwardly neo-liberal Tories goes a long way back with many of the same character actors. So the divisions are not a theatrical smokescreen to distract us from the unfolding master plan of the brexit brain lords. They are however destructively idiotic) quite real. Sometimes a cigar is.. you know. This does not mean that special measures and emergency powers are not being planned as in the event of crashing out without a deal. A crash out with no transition period would bring chaos and disruption that would have to be managed and though this may be the desired outcome of some of the ’true believers’ I do not think that this is the aim of May and Olly Robins (the civil servant who probably cooked up Checkers). Robins and May knows (whatever she says) that no deal would be catastrophic. But to be honest Ian I am just like most of my benighted British brethren guessing and dancing on the edge of the precipice our fate in the hands of (for the most part) self serving narcissists on the road to no-where. Somehow this tailspin feels even worse than JP’s grand conspiracy. Best David On 16 Oct 2018, at 12:57, Iain Findlay-Walsh wrote: > Dear David/all. > > I have never posted here before (but long been a lurker!), however this > thread on Brexit presents an opportunity to share a recent twitter thread on > Brexit, which I came to indirectly via social media. As far as I am aware, > the author of the following twitter posts is a well-known whistle-blower, and > now author and film-maker. I don't know any of his work so am taking this > info at face value. > > The reason I post the following is that, as an explanation/interpretation of > the UK gov's Brexit-related activities and statements, as played out via UK > news media, it is the only account I have read which comes close to 'ringing > true'. The narrative of the UK gov's 'incompetence' seems too politically > convenient to take at face value, and a united strategy of feigning division > and creating chaos as a smokescreen for power-grab stacks up much more > plausibly esp. in light of clear parallels along these lines in the US. What > I find to be strange is that the possibility of united and disingenuous UK > gov strategy and narrative has never been raised in the press, as far as I > have seen. As with many recent high profile political events in the UK > recently, perhaps the real concern is the role of a supportive and compliant > media across the board, in presenting what may be an entirely and knowingly > false narrative. > > I would be interested in anyone's thoughts on the twitter posts below, in > relation to David Garcia's previous comment and what has already been posted. > > Here is the twitter commentary I am referring to - > > https://twitter.com/J_amesp/status/1046828583484821504?s=19 > @J_amesp > > "Right, I really don't care whether people listen to this Brexit thread. It's > just here. > > This is a sanitised briefing. It is rated as "high level of confidence" and > supported by OSINT, meaning it comes from multiple, reliable sources and is > supported by open source information. > > Numerous sources have confirmed the British government is deliberately aiming > for a no deal Brexit outcome in order to take advantage of extended powers > available to them under the scenario - including civil contingencies and > so-called Henry VIII
Re: Bad news for Brexit Junkies! - worse news for Labour and remainers
Hi David, Hi All, I've been a continual participant in online discussion of the national insanity that is Brexit, and have come to a few conclusions. For those of you not based in the UK, the whole debate and internal conflict may appear utterly incomprehensible - but I believe it has brought some uncomfortable truths to the fore: (1) The "United Kingdom" is not a nation state as Europe knows it. It's actually a shrunken, dwarf empire. (2) Areas outside the Southeast (both the nations: Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) the Regions (The Midlands, The North, The South West) and the unrecognised nations (Cornwall, Mercia, Northumbria) are effectively colonies under occupation by London. London has total, full spectrum dominance over the national narrative. (3) Britain is suffering from a kind of post-imperial psychosis. (4) Britain is notable in being the only European nation to have failed to rid itself of hereditary rulers. Of the 250 or so Dukes in Britain (that's the highest level of the aristocracy outside royalty) around 180 of them still own the land that their ancestors owned just after the Norman Conquest. That represents nearly 1000 years of occupation. They will stop at NOTHING to retain their hidden power. (5) Britain's manifestly defective parliamentary system is really window dressing, that conceals other centres of power. Well, quite clearly I'm beginning to sound like a member of the tinfoil hat brigade - but seriously, the level of democratic failure and delusional thinking at the highest levels of governance are hard to explain in other ways. All the best, James P.S. I've been working on some Brexit-based art. Anyone interested? On 16/10/2018 09:24, David Garcia wrote: The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity. (W.B. Yates.. The Second Coming) Its a critical juncture in a very very complex moment of a 4 dimensional chess that the UK pretends to be playing with an opponent, but is actually playing with itself (in every sense, including the vulgar sense of wanking our time away). Actually Kier Starmer -the Captain Sensible of the Brexit narrative- is incrementally (and with some skill) inching the Labour Party’s leadership towards a refferendum on the deal (I dislike the sterile populism of the ‘people’s vote' tag but it seems to have caught on). In yesterday’s tragic parliamentary performance May stood isolated and friendless trapped by her own cack-handed trail of bad decisions and contradictory ‘red lines’. Apart from the isolation of someone whose only piece on the chess board is the king which is being relentlessly pushed towards the innevitable one other thing stood out. Accross parliament MPs from all paties except the DUP were increasingly advocating the once unmentionable concept of a 'referndum on the deal’ (or ratification). MPs who have not taken that position before such Dominic Reeve argued for it. This fas has moved from a being a very faint possibility to a distinct option as one of the only ways to resolve political paralysis. This would be not so much a ‘people’s vote’ as the equivalent of the consent form the patient must sign before undergoing a highly risky piece of useless cosmetic surgery about to be perfomed of an ageing dowager suffering from severe delusions of grandure. David Garcia On 16 Oct 2018, at 07:35, Patrice Riemens wrote: On 2018-06-17 11:15, Patrice Riemens wrote: BonDi! In today's Guardian/Observer: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/17/europe-losing-interest-brexit-soap-it-has-bigger-worries Cheers, p+2D! That was then - but even earlier there was: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/27/brexit-six-tests-eu-starmer-corbyn (referd to in to-day's Guardian, hence ...) I'm afraid that's going to be the scenario. A Labour party led by an Eurosceptic at heart too afraid to ruffle feathers f its brexiters voters (who mind well have changed their minds in the meantime), and going for the 'extend and pretend' scenario ... Brexit gonna be a disaster - and not only for UK, even if far worse there. Salvini appears to have backtracked on Riace deportations Cheers, no cheers, I dunno p+2D! # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Bad news for Brexit Junkies! - worse news for Labour and remainers
Dear David/all. I have never posted here before (but long been a lurker!), however this thread on Brexit presents an opportunity to share a recent twitter thread on Brexit, which I came to indirectly via social media. As far as I am aware, the author of the following twitter posts is a well-known whistle-blower, and now author and film-maker. I don't know any of his work so am taking this info at face value. The reason I post the following is that, as an explanation/interpretation of the UK gov's Brexit-related activities and statements, as played out via UK news media, it is the only account I have read which comes close to 'ringing true'. The narrative of the UK gov's 'incompetence' seems too politically convenient to take at face value, and a united strategy of feigning division and creating chaos as a smokescreen for power-grab stacks up much more plausibly esp. in light of clear parallels along these lines in the US. What I find to be strange is that the possibility of united and disingenuous UK gov strategy and narrative has never been raised in the press, as far as I have seen. As with many recent high profile political events in the UK recently, perhaps the real concern is the role of a supportive and compliant media across the board, in presenting what may be an entirely and knowingly false narrative. I would be interested in anyone's thoughts on the twitter posts below, in relation to David Garcia's previous comment and what has already been posted. Here is the twitter commentary I am referring to - https://twitter.com/J_amesp/status/1046828583484821504?s=19 @J_amesp "Right, I really don't care whether people listen to this Brexit thread. It's just here. This is a sanitised briefing. It is rated as "high level of confidence" and supported by OSINT, meaning it comes from multiple, reliable sources and is supported by open source information. Numerous sources have confirmed the British government is deliberately aiming for a no deal Brexit outcome in order to take advantage of extended powers available to them under the scenario - including civil contingencies and so-called Henry VIII. The Chequers plan is a ploy designed to engage the EU in distraction from the desired British outcome and create a false narrative at home in the UK that the EU are responsible. Sources claim emergency legislation is being prepared for January next year (2019) when the Withdrawal Act no deal deadlines pass - this would be 29/01 and the civil contingencies secretariat have been convened as per leaked Hammond notes recently, adding credibility. On Ireland: The British government hopes the EU will be forced to move first and install a hard border in Ireland in order to avoid blame itself for a situation it has created. Further sources claim the data harvested during Repeal 8th will be used in some "unity" campaigns. The British government has progressed trade talks with the US to the point of potential emergency supply, moving substantially beyond informal discussions - though the Trump administration should not be taken at its word, a degree of reliance on this has been factored in UK side. The government intends to create a tax haven on the EU's doorstep to exploit financial service deregulation. This speaks for itself. The British government aims to prevent France and other EU countries from properly preparing for no deal by continuing to falsely engage in the negotiations in bad faith, keeping the EU27 from moving from early stage plans to contingency measures as long as possible. The British government hopes this will create a ripple effect of impact so it can later pursue a "Europe in chaos" narrative of disinformation and exploit the situation. In short hoping to spread the load of no deal impact, particularly into France due to geographical impact. The British government hopes this collateral damage will add to planned disruption around the EU election processes next spring and they will use dissident relationships to further this - likely to include Orban. The British are aware that contingency planning in France has not yet reached operational unit level even in the GIGN because the general French presumption is that the British government is genuinely engaged in good faith, which they are not. Ends." Thanks, Iain Findlay-Walsh On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 9:24 AM David Garcia < d.gar...@new-tactical-research.co.uk> wrote: > The best lack all conviction, while the worst > Are full of passionate intensity. > (W.B. Yates.. The Second Coming) > > Its a critical juncture in a very very complex moment of a 4 dimensional > chess that the UK pretends to be playing with an opponent, but is > actually playing with itself (in every sense, including the vulgar sense > of > wanking our time away). > > Actually Kier Starmer -the Captain Sensible of the Brexit narrative- is > incrementally (and with some skill) inching the Labour Party’s leadership > towards a refferendum on the deal (I dislike the sterile
Re: Bad news for Brexit Junkies! - worse news for Labour and remainers
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity. (W.B. Yates.. The Second Coming) Its a critical juncture in a very very complex moment of a 4 dimensional chess that the UK pretends to be playing with an opponent, but is actually playing with itself (in every sense, including the vulgar sense of wanking our time away). Actually Kier Starmer -the Captain Sensible of the Brexit narrative- is incrementally (and with some skill) inching the Labour Party’s leadership towards a refferendum on the deal (I dislike the sterile populism of the ‘people’s vote' tag but it seems to have caught on). In yesterday’s tragic parliamentary performance May stood isolated and friendless trapped by her own cack-handed trail of bad decisions and contradictory ‘red lines’. Apart from the isolation of someone whose only piece on the chess board is the king which is being relentlessly pushed towards the innevitable one other thing stood out. Accross parliament MPs from all paties except the DUP were increasingly advocating the once unmentionable concept of a 'referndum on the deal’ (or ratification). MPs who have not taken that position before such Dominic Reeve argued for it. This fas has moved from a being a very faint possibility to a distinct option as one of the only ways to resolve political paralysis. This would be not so much a ‘people’s vote’ as the equivalent of the consent form the patient must sign before undergoing a highly risky piece of useless cosmetic surgery about to be perfomed of an ageing dowager suffering from severe delusions of grandure. David Garcia On 16 Oct 2018, at 07:35, Patrice Riemens wrote: > On 2018-06-17 11:15, Patrice Riemens wrote: >> BonDi! >> In today's Guardian/Observer: >> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/17/europe-losing-interest-brexit-soap-it-has-bigger-worries >> Cheers, p+2D! > > > That was then - but even earlier there was: > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/27/brexit-six-tests-eu-starmer-corbyn > > (referd to in to-day's Guardian, hence ...) > > I'm afraid that's going to be the scenario. A Labour party led by an > Eurosceptic at heart too afraid to ruffle feathers f its brexiters voters > (who mind well have changed their minds in the meantime), and going for the > 'extend and pretend' scenario ... > > Brexit gonna be a disaster - and not only for UK, even if far worse there. > > Salvini appears to have backtracked on Riace deportations > > Cheers, no cheers, I dunno > > p+2D! # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
