Re: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Heiko Recktenwald]

I loved Tempelhof. As a piece of art, a sacrifice. However useless.
Luxury for all.


Am 28/01/19 um 17:27 schrieb André Rebentisch:

> - The notion of sovereignty recently became subject to delusional right
> wing state concepts which are ultimately ahistorical. Framed as a
> unrestrained right of the people to govern their own affairs we also
> find it in left wing discourse and populist criticism of the financial
> markets. Ultimately democracy also finds its limits in the laws of
> physics when a democratic majority might suggest icarus deserves his
> right to fly.


Old Iran is very good in this. And there were times when you could sell
and buy countries. Sovereignty means that you are allowed to change your
mind.


Best, H.

#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[André Rebentisch]

Thank you Heiko for opening this discussion. Three anecdotal observations:

1. We had a referendum whether to keep Tegel Airport open. Citizens of
Berlin got a letter from the government urging them to vote against. I
think this should not happen as a matter of principle and is an abuse of
executive powers, however the legal base is a right of the city to
inform. I filed a complaint that was dismissed with reference to a court
case of another party. When public officials can't see that direct
participation in public opinion building cannot be financed by state
funds, that casts a bad light on the governance of this city. Of course
there is a difference between information and the transgressing call to
vote in a specific way. In general politicians seem increasingly unable
to grasp the difference of taking a stand as a partisan politician and
in an official function.
2. Dictatorships usually use a referendum to lend legitimacy to an abuse
of power or an anti-constitutional state of emergency.
3. Tempelhof referendum: Here the public voted for a maximalist stance
because in a referendum there is virtually no compromise. As a result
one may not build *anything* on Tempelhof air field. The counter
proposal was a modest construction permit at the outskirts of the field.
Political decisions in Parliament on the other hand are always compromises.

Other remarks
- There is no written UK constitution.
- On Brexit we find a radicalization of the outcome.
- For me democracy means the right to contest a rule to which voting is
only an instrument at your disposal. The purpose of these instruments is
to make citizens the master and to educate the institutions to be their
servants. A perfect servant does not ask you unless required but does
what you want.

As illustrated by a comedy classic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ENZglTjDrA

- The notion of sovereignty recently became subject to delusional right
wing state concepts which are ultimately ahistorical. Framed as a
unrestrained right of the people to govern their own affairs we also
find it in left wing discourse and populist criticism of the financial
markets. Ultimately democracy also finds its limits in the laws of
physics when a democratic majority might suggest icarus deserves his
right to fly.

Best,
André

Am 28.01.19 um 03:39 schrieb Heiko Recktenwald:

> "Direct democracy", is this a fashion of politicians without
> responbibility or a principle of constitutional law of the UK? Like the
> sovereignty of parliament. Maybe we should rethink democracy once more.
> Is direct democracy good in all cases? Obviously not.


#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[David Garcia]

Patrice, is completely right.. One of the amendments to May’s “deal" (sadly it 
will not 
succeed-it ay no longer be in play) is one to be put by Stella Creasy which 
would mandate 
more time by suspending article 50 not simply to delay the innevitable but of a 
final vote but 
a vote supported by the convening ‘Citizens Assemblies’ in a manner that 
mirrors the approach 
taken by the Irish abortion refferendum. This points to wider implications for 
how we might 
change how we change the way we do politics. 

When I first heard about Citizen’s Assemblies I had no idea about how they 
worked (sortation) and of 
how they are increasingly becoming an important addition the democratic process 
in a number 
of countries, particularly when facing issues that are highly contentious and 
divisive . As Patrice has 
pointed out they were very important part of how the Abortion referendum in 
Ireland was conducted.
As ever the Finton O’Tool essay is that Patrice provides a link to, is 
extremely illuminating. 
Among the many impotant observations for this list is the way in which this 
process appeared to undercut 
the use of polarising tactics and deliberate fake facts micro targeting 
facilitated by sophisticated 
data analytics. The anti-knowledge tactic of dismissing expertise completely 
failed inpart because Citizans fora 
changed the relationship between citizen and expert. It is vital and neglected 
aspect of what is being proposed 
and its future promise in addressing the much greater existential issues 
associated Anthropocene.
 
Brilliant as O’tool’s artcle is, he and other commentators need to pay more 
attention to is the importance 
to the evolution of the role of expert knowledge (ethics,medical, legal) played 
in the Irish forums. What is 
vital to comprehend is that they were not brought in as regulators. Nor as the 
voice of power and authority. 
They were a resource that citizens could draw on in the prcess of coming to 
their conclusions. We could look 
on this as the beginings of an important broadly based move towards a more 
dynamic, experimental and less 
defferntial relationship not only between experts and citizens. It could 
articulate a new relationship 
between citizens, the unelected regime of regulation (expertocracy), and the 
political class and the judiciary. 
This is the direction in which we must travel to take us beyond te epistemic 
crisis of the cybernetic era.




On 28 Jan 2019, at 06:15, Patrice Riemens  wrote:

> On 2019-01-28 03:39, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:
>> Am 18/01/19 um 16:48 schrieb James Wallbank:
>>> Thanks for this summary David, I'd suggest that it's broadly accurate.
>>> Some of you may have noticed that Brexit has pretty much incinerated
>>> my social media presence (which used to focus on the impacts of
>>> digital engagement and transformation on the arts, culture, and
>>> locality,(plus a smattering of green issues). Now its focus is almost
>>> exclusively the madness of Brexit, which I can only interpret as the
>>> national equivalent of a nervous breakdown.
>> For me the basic problem is direct democracy as in referendum. And
>> second referendum. It may be unpopular because direct democracy looks
>> like the non plus ultra of democracy but Brexit shows that the non plus
>> ultra of democracy is the sovereignty of parliament. Also as far as a
>> second referendum is concerned. All that is necessary for "remain" is a
>> decision by a simple majority of MPs.
>> "Direct democracy", is this a fashion of politicians without
>> responbibility or a principle of constitutional law of the UK? Like the
>> sovereignty of parliament. Maybe we should rethink democracy once more.
>> Is direct democracy good in all cases? Obviously not.
>> Best, H.
> 
> 
> Heiko's remarks completely bypasses the fact (sorry, it's a fact) that the 
> British 'Brexit' referendum was a clusterfaktap of major magnitude (& 
> probably 'deliberate by default') in terms of how a real, valid referendum 
> should be prepared and organised, even if you don't have the Swiss experience 
> in running one.
> 
> These two opinion pieces, highlighting the differences between the Irish 
> abortion referendum ('in the end the people knew what they were voting for') 
> and the British one (obfuscation central) should settle the score:
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/29/brexit-ireland-referendum-experiment-trusting-people
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/26/brexiters-never-had-a-real-exit-plan-no-wonder-they-avoided-the-issue
> 
> True democracy is direct democracy, difficult to handle as it is. 
> Representative democracy, unless representatives are kept at a short leash by 
> their constituents - never mind how representative a first pass the post 
> system is - is a snapshot at best, and an elected dictatorship at worst.
> 
> Cheers to all, p+2D!
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,

Re: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Heiko Recktenwald]

Am 18/01/19 um 12:08 schrieb David Garcia:
>
> Finaly its a pity all these thinkers I am referencing are men.. How
> much of these neo-nationalist pathologies are man made…?


There is no difference. I have a brother in London with a small freehold
house and family and the mother of the best frtiend of his daughter
asked after the Brexit: "What is the problem, you have to leave". They
dont have to leave but this does not make it better.


The Brexiters had a bigger problem that is a real problem of the EU as
well. There are no Europeans, not even in the European parliament. The
role of nations and democracy. Democracy in a nation is something else.
A nation is more like a family. The EU has changed. It is not the EU it
once was with very limited competences. It is directed towards a
"superstate" that caqn do everything. And there are tensions. The Brexit
was one answer to those tensions. The other answer would have been to
make opposition from within the EU. See the Poles, Hungary, Italy, all
other nations. Ok, wer can say that thzey are terrible and special but
they are just Poles and Hungarians or Italians. Why should they not have
another will than Brussels? Merkel will punish them? Nothing has changed
under the sun.


The present chaos is owed to the fact that the EU is also a reality.
Facts have changed and not just the law. We  have learnt in lawschool
that an exit was impossible. This was not a question of law but of the
facts. The legal freedom to leave did not change the facts.


Best, H.

#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Heiko Recktenwald]

Dear all,

Am 28/01/19 um 07:15 schrieb Patrice Riemens:

<<
True democracy is direct democracy, difficult to handle as it is.
Representative democracy, unless representatives are kept at a short
leash by their constituents - never mind how representative a first pass
the post system is - is a snapshot at best, and an elected dictatorship
at worst.
>>


I dont think this anymore. Democracy is about decisions. They shall not
be made by one person. "Direct democracy" is not more than an opinion
poll. Why should the "real majority" not be a dictator as well? And why
should "the people" not cange their mind? Who will ask them then? And
why should "the people" matter at all? But first of all "the people"
have no place in the constitution as far as decisions are concerned. If
constitutions matter. And why should "the people" be bound by a
constitution? Or any rules of law?


https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/role/sovereignty/


Best, H.

#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Patrice Riemens]

On 2019-01-28 03:39, Heiko Recktenwald wrote:

Am 18/01/19 um 16:48 schrieb James Wallbank:


Thanks for this summary David, I'd suggest that it's broadly accurate.

Some of you may have noticed that Brexit has pretty much incinerated
my social media presence (which used to focus on the impacts of
digital engagement and transformation on the arts, culture, and
locality,(plus a smattering of green issues). Now its focus is almost
exclusively the madness of Brexit, which I can only interpret as the
national equivalent of a nervous breakdown.



For me the basic problem is direct democracy as in referendum. And
second referendum. It may be unpopular because direct democracy looks
like the non plus ultra of democracy but Brexit shows that the non plus
ultra of democracy is the sovereignty of parliament. Also as far as a
second referendum is concerned. All that is necessary for "remain" is a
decision by a simple majority of MPs.


"Direct democracy", is this a fashion of politicians without
responbibility or a principle of constitutional law of the UK? Like the
sovereignty of parliament. Maybe we should rethink democracy once more.
Is direct democracy good in all cases? Obviously not.


Best, H.



Heiko's remarks completely bypasses the fact (sorry, it's a fact) that 
the British 'Brexit' referendum was a clusterfaktap of major magnitude 
(& probably 'deliberate by default') in terms of how a real, valid 
referendum should be prepared and organised, even if you don't have the 
Swiss experience in running one.


These two opinion pieces, highlighting the differences between the Irish 
abortion referendum ('in the end the people knew what they were voting 
for') and the British one (obfuscation central) should settle the score:


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/29/brexit-ireland-referendum-experiment-trusting-people

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/26/brexiters-never-had-a-real-exit-plan-no-wonder-they-avoided-the-issue

True democracy is direct democracy, difficult to handle as it is. 
Representative democracy, unless representatives are kept at a short 
leash by their constituents - never mind how representative a first pass 
the post system is - is a snapshot at best, and an elected dictatorship 
at worst.


Cheers to all, 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:

Re: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Heiko Recktenwald]

Am 18/01/19 um 16:48 schrieb James Wallbank:
>
> Thanks for this summary David, I'd suggest that it's broadly accurate.
>
> Some of you may have noticed that Brexit has pretty much incinerated
> my social media presence (which used to focus on the impacts of
> digital engagement and transformation on the arts, culture, and
> locality,(plus a smattering of green issues). Now its focus is almost
> exclusively the madness of Brexit, which I can only interpret as the
> national equivalent of a nervous breakdown.
>

For me the basic problem is direct democracy as in referendum. And
second referendum. It may be unpopular because direct democracy looks
like the non plus ultra of democracy but Brexit shows that the non plus
ultra of democracy is the sovereignty of parliament. Also as far as a
second referendum is concerned. All that is necessary for "remain" is a
decision by a simple majority of MPs.


"Direct democracy", is this a fashion of politicians without
responbibility or a principle of constitutional law of the UK? Like the
sovereignty of parliament. Maybe we should rethink democracy once more.
Is direct democracy good in all cases? Obviously not.


Best, H.

#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Brian Holmes]

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 5:08 AM David Garcia wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ksdrYYUY2w

That's a totally engaging lecture, I recommend it to anyone. He's right
that a thousand soundbites about Brexit have told us nothing. One's life,
identity, political community and institutional system are worth an hour -
and from my position on the outside, to hear those issues so vigorously
debated actually makes me care about the whole thing in a way I could not
before.

If I have understood, he's saying that the disempowerment of the English
leave voters comes most obviously from a tremendous shift of wealth under
neoliberalism: 1% of the global population now owns a staggering 46% of all
wealth, up from 36% in 2017 (and one can imagine how many of those 1
percenters work in the City). But behind that, he's saying that the core
English leave voters have no representation or identity except that of
Great Britain, which is an imperial construct. Therefore their attempt to
regain a collective sense of self and take back control over their own
lives is routed through the imperial past - exactly that horrible legacy
recalled by Pankaj Mishra and so many others.

By contrast he shows a beautiful photo of the small, and apparently quite
racially diverse, Scottish parliament, where people voted Remain, and he
also makes some brilliant remarks concerning what people love about the EU,
namely regulation: clean beaches, food that doesn't poison you...

I believe a similar scenario applies to the US. We will never escape the
white supremacist nightmare until we cease upholding the obsolete
privileges of empire. Those who are getting out of that nightmare
(especially the West Coast) do so by engaging a political community at a
somewhat smaller scale (California is *only* 40 million people...). Of
course, they accept and value regulation, the kind that is antithetical to
empire, I mean.

"Finally its a pity all these thinkers I am referencing are men.. How much
of these neo-nationalist pathologies are man made…?"

Well, empire is pretty closely connected to what in the US is now called
"toxic masculinity." It's one of the big battlegrounds, really, because
that's how empire is embodied (soldiers, brain-damaging American
football...) The interesting thing in the US is that all the progressive
attention is now on the large number of women who just got voted into
Congress, so maybe there's a chance for something different.

Brian
#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[James Wallbank]

Thanks for this summary David, I'd suggest that it's broadly accurate.

Some of you may have noticed that Brexit has pretty much incinerated my 
social media presence (which used to focus on the impacts of digital 
engagement and transformation on the arts, culture, and locality,(plus a 
smattering of green issues). Now its focus is almost exclusively the 
madness of Brexit, which I can only interpret as the national equivalent 
of a nervous breakdown.


Many commentators have suggested that "The North" and "The Midlands" 
were the seat of Brexit - and they may be mathematically correct, but 
interpretationally quite wrong. I grew up in The Midlands, and I now 
live in The North, and in my view the "leave" vote was NOT driven by 
extreme nationalism, nor hostility to the EU, nor by hostility to 
immigration - core themes grasped onto by Theresa May, who insists that 
they are key. Sections of the Conservative party are preoccupied by 
these ideas.


I believe that the Leave vote was primarily driven by hostility towards 
Westminster itself. Voters listened to what the vast majority of Members 
of Parliament asserted, and decided "You people have been running 
Britain against our interests for years - so we'll vote for the opposite 
of what you recommend.". That thought was, I suspect, most usually 
suffixed by the phrase "You scumbags!"


Recently the output of BBC News has not been that of a balanced, 
reasonable or fair broadcaster. It has been incredibly (almost 
comically) influenced by Conservative Party advocates of a Hard, or No 
Deal Brexit. There are numerous examples that I won't review here. How 
this bias has been introduced is not clear, but it is noteworthy that 
key senior BBC roles are now undertaken by people who have previously 
been Conservative activists, or who are known to have extreme neoliberal 
or nationalistic views.


However, I can recommend a recent, very low-key documentary "Brexit: 
Bewitched, Bothered or Bewildered" by BBC broadcaster Adrian Chiles. 
Chiles grew up in The Midlands, and immediately after the Leave vote, 
went to his home area, Erdington, and interviewed Leave and Remain 
voters. This documentary is a return to those same interviewees, and 
other local people, two and a half years later. The interviews reveal 
surprisingly nuanced views, and I was surprised by the overall balance.


I recommend it.

There's a copy of this documentary on YouTube here: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXy6IwgqZkQ


You can find the official copy of it on the BBC here: 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0001v00


This brings me to the question of "National Nervous Breakdown".

I think I've said on this channel before that I'm starting to see the 
roots of Brexit in the supercentralism of the UK - all media, politics, 
cultural amplification and state interventions are MASSIVELY centred on 
London. Centred to the extent that, despite London being the richest 
metropolitan area of the EU, and despite many of the poorest regions in 
the EU being located in the UK, governmental intervention cultural and 
infrastructure spending is massively focused on London.


Transport infrastructure PER HEAD of population is massively biased 
towards London, as is cultural spending. An order of magnitude greater 
expenditure per head is made on Transport, and the Arts Council spends 
more than ELEVEN TIMES the amount PER ARTIST on artists and activities 
in London. These are just two examples - but there are many more. The 
"anti-regional strategy" of successive UK Governments has been evident 
for several decades.


In my view, it is objection to this supercentralism, not, perversely, 
anything whatever to do with the European Union, that motivated the 
Leave vote. It is worthy of note that the British "First Past The Post" 
electoral system effectively denies most voters an audible voice, so 
when a referendum was agreed, voters seized on the opportunity to roar 
with rage.


There is no other nation like the United Kingdom.

You may imagine that this is a rhetorical flourish - but I invite you, 
as evidence, to examine the National Flags section of Emoji.


What other nation manages to claim not one, but FOUR flags?

The Union Flag, The English Flag, The Welsh Flag, The Scottish Flag.

Note that this is weird enough, but there is no Northern Irish Flag 
represented, DESPITE the UK's claim that it is an equally valid one of 
four nations that make up the UK.


What's going on here? To me, it has become clear that "The United 
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" is SIMPLY NOT A NATION 
STATE in the modern sense. It's an atrophied, shrunken Empire in 
miniature, with the imperial capital in London. The supercentralism I 
previously identified is a remnant of imperialism, and regions outside 
London are treated as occupied dominions.


It is this weirdness, this lack of coherence, this failure to engage 
with modernity and globalism, that has caused the current breakdown, and 
until it

Re: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[David Garcia]

Thanks Keith, yes I am an an enthusiastic follower of Fintan O’tool’s writing 
and lectures. Its instructive that in both the cases we have mentioned 
from Ireland and India both in different ways victims of English post-collonial 
delusion. The fact that Ireland 
barely featured in the refferndum campaign and yet is now threatening to 
de-rail the whole process is indicative of the persistance of the post 
imperial cataract that continues to obscure England's vision of itself and 
others.

There has been one writer that I have found useful  (English this time) Anthony 
Barnett whose Lure of Greatness sees Brexit as 
a crisis arising not simply from the UK but as an English malady, founded on a 
large  hole in the heart of the ‘English’ national identity now that the 
other so called 'home nations’ have their own assemblies. Their flags are not 
associated with racist gangs in the way that the flag of St George is. 
They have been able articulate a different conception of national identity.. A 
reasonable substitute for reading his book is this Youtube lecture.. 
curious what people think.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ksdrYYUY2w 

Finaly its a pity all these thinkers I am referencing are men.. How much of 
these neo-nationalist pathologies are man made…?

Best

David




On 18 Jan 2019, at 10:36, Keith Hart  wrote:

> >...a brilliant and utterly coruscating essay published in the NY Times by 
> >Pankaj Mishra a writer and polemicist from India who situates the crisis in 
> >English post-colonial delusion <
> 
> Thanks, David. You are right that Brexit is the UK's post-imperial hangover 
> come home to roost. Have spent my adult life waiting for Brits to wake up in 
> this regard and I am not convinced that even this will do the job. In the 
> early twentieth century, the strongest political  and  intellectual 
> opposition to the Empire came from Ireland, India and South Africa and the 
> first two are still the best source. Apart from Pankaj Mishra, Fintan O'Toole 
> is keeping up the good work with his book, Heroic Failure: Brexit and the 
> politics of pain. Ireland is noted for its literary Nobel prize-winners and 
> he is well up to standard. His latest article came out today:  
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/18/europe-brexit-britain-state-politics-fit-for-purpose
>  
> 
> O'Toole's point -- that Brexit was never about Europe, but rather about the 
> home political dispensation -- is one that I have been making for two 
> decades. I call it the creeping constitutional crisis of the cruel historical 
> experiment, the United Kingdom. I wrote "Where once was an empire" soon after 
> the 2016 referendum result: 
> https://www.academia.edu/29662300/Where_once_was_an_empire_on_Brexit_ 
> 
> Best,
> 
> Keith
>>  
>> #  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:
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>>  
>> Keith Hart
>> keith-hart.com
> 
> #  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:
> 
> 
> -- 
>   
> Keith Hart
> keith-hart.com

#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Keith Hart]

>
> >...a brilliant and utterly coruscating essay published in the NY Times by
> Pankaj Mishra a writer and polemicist from India who situates the crisis in
> English post-colonial delusion <
>
> Thanks, David. You are right that Brexit is the UK's post-imperial
> hangover come home to roost. Have spent my adult life waiting for Brits to
> wake up in this regard and I am not convinced that even this will do the
> job. In the early twentieth century, the strongest political  and
> intellectual opposition to the Empire came from Ireland, India and South
> Africa and the first two are still the best source. Apart from Pankaj
> Mishra, Fintan O'Toole is keeping up the good work with his book, Heroic
> Failure: Brexit and the politics of pain. Ireland is noted for its literary
> Nobel prize-winners and he is well up to standard. His latest article came
> out today:
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/18/europe-brexit-britain-state-politics-fit-for-purpose
>
>

O'Toole's point -- that Brexit was never about Europe, but rather about the
home political dispensation -- is one that I have been making for two
decades. I call it the creeping constitutional crisis of the cruel
historical experiment, the United Kingdom. I wrote "Where once was an
empire" soon after the 2016 referendum result:
https://www.academia.edu/29662300/Where_once_was_an_empire_on_Brexit_

Best,

Keith

>
>
>> #  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:
>
>
>
> --
>
> 
> Keith Hart
> keith-hart.com
> 
>
>
> #  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:



-- 

Keith Hart
keith-hart.com

#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[David Garcia]

Thanks Keith for fleshing out the wider political context for our “little local 
difficulty” that sprang from Cameron’s reckless gamble 
that had everything to do with the Tory party and resulted in a deep national 
psychosis. Sorry if this sounds like histrionics 
but its how it feels. 

I want to pass on to nettimes an even broader perspective a powerful article 
that Brian Holmes was kind enough to share (hope thats ok Brian) a brilliant 
and utterly 
corruscating essay published in the NY Times by Pankaj Mishra a writer and 
polemicist from India who situates the crisis in English post-colonal delusion 
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/sunday/brexit-ireland-empire.html  

Best

David

On 17 Jan 2019, at 17:46, Keith Hart  wrote:

> 
>  
> #  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:
> 
> 
> -- 
>   
> Keith Hart
> keith-hart.com

#  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: notes from Brexania in limbo...

[Keith Hart]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 5:29 PM David Garcia <
d.gar...@new-tactical-research.co.uk> wrote:

> I read nearly everything written and watch the parliamentary debates
> and the only
> consistent message that emerges is that "no one knows anything”. So this
> is what I
>
think I know becoming less certain as you go down the bullet points:
>

Thanks, David, for this lucid summary which, as you  say, mirrors most of
what is out there in public. I suggest that the forces driving the
stalemate are similar on both sides but, for obvious reasons, not
acknowledged. The Tory extreme Brexiteers and Corbyn's Bennite politburo
both want the most damage possible to society so that their version of
revolution will take over in the rubble. The best guarantee of this is no
deal.

The Tory Alt-right are a financial cabal with international interests
linked to the City of London, offshore  tax havens and London-based
billionaires (Russian, Greek etc). After 600 years of no laws, the City
must at all costs resist the threat of being subject to supervision by
French politicians and German bureaucrats. They have precious little stake
in the national economy, less in the Celtic fringe and even less in the
preservation of what passes for political and legal order or the people's
welfare. May was appointed to supervise the consequences of Boris Johnson's
Leave campaign and decided that her only chance of survival was to play in
their way, even though she voted remain. Her MO is intransigence and she
knows she is on the way out, but the logic remains the same even at this
late stage.

The Corbynites are 70s Marxists whose only dream is a socialist revolution
in one country led by them. It is not that they fear the EU, but staying in
the EU or a soft Brexit would strengthen the British status quo, even the
UK itself. Corbyn can say he's in favour of a Customs Union since the other
side will never let him have it. The same goes for demanding a general
election. The timing should be after the deluge not before it. They and the
Brexiteers need to run down the clock to a no deal fiasco. In Corbyn's case
this means staying out of the charade of cross-party discussions and making
several no confidence motions even if they are bound to fail. The Liberals
have sussed that one out and say they will not vote against the government
in any further moves of this kind from Labour. Both sides will not
contemplate another referendum since it will end up as remain. Extension of
the time limit will likewise be dangerous for their strategy --some people
may find out the real reasons for their behaviour. The problem is that in
each party the group calling the shots is small but, for now, powerful.

The difference between this scenario and yours, David, (the media's and
politicians' public statements) is that mine is based on no evidence
whatsoever.  Sometimes a novelist manque can beat the journalists and
academics.

Keith



> #  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:



-- 

Keith Hart
keith-hart.com

#  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:

notes from Brexania in limbo...

[David Garcia]

My friend Eric Kluitenberg asked for my local view of the current situation in 
Brexania. It gave me the chance 
to pull some threads together. Some caveats this is a view from the sidelines. 
The journalists are all suffering 
from as much confusion and exhaustion..as the rest of the population.

I read nearly everything written and watch the parliamentary debates and follow 
commentators including  
my dear Uncle Fred (who is dead by the way and so should know a thing or two 
about the after life) and the only 
consistent message that emerges is that "no one knows anything”. 

So this is what I think I know becoming less certain as you go down the bullet 
points:

* Although Parliament rejected May’s deal Parliament does not know what it 
wants instead.

* No majority for any plan and so Parliament is deadlocked

* The only Parliamentary majority is to avoid ’no deal’ 'crash out' but no can 
agree 
how to avoid it as the date is set in law and cannot be repealed without
a new law being passed. 

* May will not take ‘no deal’ off the table as it is her principle means of 
terrorising parliament to get her way on her be-hated deal.

* Though she denies it May is running down the clock till we get so close to
the precipice that parliament votes for her deal out of sheer terror.

* Even after the biggest defeat in parliamentary history she continues to 
pursue this strategy that some called gritty and brave and others (me) 
call rigid and pathological. 

* There is reason to believe that the current ‘consultations’ with
other parties (May in listening mode ha ha) are tokenistic cover for her 
continued 
pursuit of the ticking clock strategy.. tick tick tick….

* The evidence for this is her refusal to take ’off deal’ off the table.. 
tick.. tick 

* This is why Corbyn may be right to refuse to talk to her because until ’no 
deal is 
off the the table’ the discussions remain a tokenistic delaying tactic. But it 
does
make Corbyn look intransigent…so risky.  

* Corbyn is heavily criticised for not backing a ‘public vote’ 

* It could be strategic.. His calculation may be to let the different options 
play themselves out 
in parliament until a new referendum is the last option left standing. But it 
is not yet clear how
these options will unfold sequentially in the way imagined as Parliament has 
little time and no 
clear method.

* If the leave voting working class Labour voters (particularly in the North of 
England) 
are not to feel betrayed a public vote must be seen as the last option 
standing. 

* Then Corbyn can turn to those constituencies and say "look I have tried my 
best 
to deliver Brexit on terms that do the least damage but was not possible. So 
over to you
the public” not my fault gov...

* If I am right this is a high risk strategy.. but maybe political 
intransigence mean that high risk 
is all that is left-short of backing May’s deal…. aahhh

* Traditional (neo-liberal) transactional politics is dead in the UK some might 
say good riddens. 
Conservative historian Peter Hennesy described ‘Brexit’ as a kind of secular 
version of the "wars of religion”. 
But instead of Protestants and Catholics we have ‘remainers’ and ‘leavers’ 
representing two very different and 
irreconcileable versions of ‘patriotism’.… but thats an argument for another 
day…

* If we do have a chance to fight a third referendum (remember there was a 
referendum to join the EU in 
1975) it will carry many risks of re-igiting toxicity. So we should keep in 
mind that enlightenment Philosopher, 
David Hume, wrote "reason is, and ought to be, the slave of the passions". In 
other words reason is inextricably 
linked to embodied emotions. In the struggle for the social mind Remainers 
(like me) should avoid sounding like the 
disembodied and controlling voice of pragmatic reason. We must argue from the 
heart and engage the passions 
as well as reason in our attempts to change the minds of the millions who voted 
to leave.. It is be no means certain 
that we will prevail. 

Best

David




On 16 Jan 2019, at 19:24, Eric Kluitenberg  wrote:

> HI David,
> 
> Hope you are doing fine!
> 
> Well, as expected the Br deal was voted down and May survived the motion of 
> no confidence.
> 
> I was curious, how do you evaluate the situation right now? Where are we on 
> both sides of canal?
> 
> all bests,
> Eric
#  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: