Winseer:
I didn’t think there was such a think as a “Corbyn led Brexit”, despite him being this supposed Eurosceptic during the Blair era of government.
I don’t know why people (i.e. you and Carryfast) call him a “supposed” Eurosceptic. His own Blairite opponents in Labour consider him a Eurosceptic, the Tories themselves have never tried to paint him as a Europhile, he has a 35-year track record in Parliament as a Eurosceptic, and is supported (and always has been good political friends with) those like Dennis Skinner who have almost a 50-year Eurosceptic track record.
If Corbyn wants to truly bolt-on some Brexiteer credentials to get some actual support from those Brextieers that are outside of Labour like myself - then he’s going to have to come up with the PLAN that Theresa May clearly has not done. That means getting rid of his Remainer Shadow Cabinet for starters, especially “Sir” Keir Starmer, who should be booted upstairs just in time for the “Other place” to be abolished - by any 2nd referendum we might eventually get bullied into!
There is unlikely to be a change of faces. And Corbyn is not trying to attract Tory Brexiteers - he’s trying to retain Labour Leavers, and quite rightly so. Indeed, Corbyn is pretty much getting everything his own way - the challenge has been to persuade the Blairite MPs and the hand-wringing liberals that his Euroscepticism is justified (and to be honest, I have become more Eurosceptic since the referendum, partly because of developments and revelations since).
THIS is why we need a clear Brexit plan from Corbyn, backed up by actual promises and commitements. There’s too much wriggle-room otherwise for both shifty Labour front benchers, and the EU alike -to whip the rug out from under ALL of us, remainers included.
Indeed, but the fact that the current management of Labour are ideological Eurosceptics in the Bennite tradition and are not careerists, and the fact that their agenda is already highly focussed on two specific issues (taking back democratic control of the economy, and an end to free movement), means that there is unlikely to be a great deal of wriggle-room.
Also, if the attitudes you and Carryfast are representative of a significant number of people, then if Corbyn does get into a fight with the EU over these issues, he’s likely to gain support at home by fighting them, rather than losing support. And left-wingers like me are likely to support the showdown (so too are workers, unions, and left-wing politicians in other EU nations), because they are crucial ideological issues for the left across Europe.
Negotating a new relationship with Europe (or forcing the EU to concede to reform), together with a domestic left-wing agenda, is the new centre-ground of politics that Corbyn now occupies.
And like I’ve said to Carryfast, it is avoiding the divisiveness of the Tories’ nationalist agenda. The EU bureaucracy has recently admitted that the ghost of Corbyn future is the ghost they fear the most, because the other members (France and Germany in particular) know that the buttons Corbyn is going to press are the issues on which they are already extremely weak at home.
Whereas the other EU members have found it easy to unite against the Tories because the Tories’ agenda is extremely unpopular with those in other EU nations, exemplified by their threatened attacks on citizens’ rights and threats to undercut on taxes and workers rights (it’s a quirk of British politics that workers here are still relatively right-wing and have been since the 70s, which is why the Tories have even had the chance to threaten these things).
In short, the EU will treat a UK “back in again” in a similar manner to the way ■■■■ Germany treated Occupied France during WWII.
Only this time around - we won’t have America on our sides, but both America and Russia as our enemies!
I think you’re mistaking the “EU” for foreign relations between nations. Military action is something negotiated between nations which the consent of each, not something that is a requirement of EU membership.