I posted this summary of Brexit options last week and I think it still holds (having updated for A50 judgement).
I continue to get feedback from referendum supporters though when I suggest their narrative has problems. Let's explore...
I continue to get feedback from referendum supporters though when I suggest their narrative has problems. Let's explore...
Narrative #1, we didn't know what we were voting for / the Russians stole the referendum. To a lot of people this sounds like you are accusing them of being stupid, not knowing what they were doing. Which doesn't tend to go down well
Narrative #2, Parliament can't decide, so it needs to go back to the people. So that's Parliament's fault, get on with it, as my imaginary leave voters may say
Narrative #3, a new referendum can reunite the country. Well, the first didn't work too well on that score did it? Why would a second not leave the country even more divided? (or third as my pedantic leaver friends will point out)
Narrative #4, now we have a deal, this is a big decision, let's vote on the specifics. Has promise, but does rather sound like you want to overturn the first result. Which you do, if we're being entirely honest.
Narrative #5, we can stay in the EU and reform freedom of movement or ECJ or whatever. Failed first time, still sounds implausible, please move on.
Narrative #6, this was rather more complex than we thought, we need a new mandate. Has some promise, if you thought we could cope with complexity in the debate.
Summary - second referendum supporters are underestimating the real anger there would be among many leave supporters. Maybe remain would win, maybe not. But hard to avoid the feeling that divisions would be entrenched further.
And it is interesting that none of these narratives is positively pro-EU - largely our membership would appear to be be an unfortunate necessity in these eyes. I know many #FBPE folk will be annoyed by these arguments, but perhaps they could reflect further /ends
