-
by not taking a position
They *have * a position. It's not the sort of position, though, where they say 'either this or we hold our breath until we die'. It's not the sort of position that's completely unchangeable. As I said, they've kept the emotional temperature low on this one. It would be a huge mistake to fall into the Tory trap of claiming that it's a central issue--it's not, it's a silly nonsense and a solution looking for a problem. That's not to say there aren't significant problems with the EU--there are, only 'Brexit' (I always put this in quote marks now because it is not one single thing, and even if it were it would be impossible to say what it was) wouldn't solve any of them and, in fact, would make them worse.
(In a nutshell, the main problems I see is that Europe's larger countries in particular, Germany specifically in the worst way, have concentrated economic gain in fewer and fewer hands, impoverishing millions, reducing internal buying power and having to rely on exports and trade harmonisation to maintain some semblance of being functional, at the expense not only of aforementioned large swathes of their own populations, but also of smaller, poorer countries, e.g. in Southern Europe. All of this needs reform and there are reasons in it to generate 'Brexiters' of both the left and right.)
I don't think 'Brexit' will be decisive electoral issue. Linking public services and 'Brexit' may have worked with the £350m lie (although the various kinds of illegal electioneering that still haven't been post-mortemmed properly were probably more decisive), but I don't think that's working now--see Johnson's repeated increasingly desperate gambles to revive the issue in his hopeless attempts to surprise everyone. Had Labour portrayed itself as a 'remain' party in the last election, it would have lost badly, not because of taking a position on 'Brexit', but because it wouldn't have been able to talk about its own, more important concerns like public services enough. 'Brexit' would have sucked up the airtime and the attention, because it's divisive*, and they didn't fall into this trap.
* I personally think that 'for the many, not the few' is technically also divisive, but of course it is felt to be inclusive by, erm, many of the many.
You are reading a single comment by @JWestland and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Oliver Schick
@JWestland
Labour is going to have to shit or get off the pot when a GE comes. That's when the division will come.
I feel it's treating people like they are dumb by not taking a position, though Oliver may be right it's the best strategy. I think they are going to lose votes though, remainers often voted strategically last GE. That may not happen now.