Thread by @Usherwood

Brexit as a collective action problem

A small-ish thread

1/

You'll have noticed that we've got rather stuck right now on Brexit.

May's statement today will be a re-presentation of the same policy that has got nowhere during the past few months, even as opponents keep pushing for the same points they've failed to secure so far

2/

So why is this?

As usual, I'm rejecting stupidity or pigheaded-ness, because that really doesn't get us anywhere

3/

Instead, let's assume a degree of rationality and reflection, much as it might pain you so to do

4/

The issue here is that everyone's operating in a system where individuals or small groups can only secure their preferred outcomes through the acquiescence of others: you might not necessarily need their support, but you do need them not to block you

5/

Normally, the system works like this: a leadership group is able to move the governing party to follow the whip, which then produces a Commons majority. Or a group of rebels in the governing party makes common cause with the opposition and gets an amendment through

6/

Obviously, we're not in normal times now.

Gvt relies on a confidence & supply arrangement, rebels are numerous, both main parties have many splits

7/

So we have a weak PM, but also a weak leader of the opposition, weak factions and a weak Parliament (so far).

The only strong actor - the EU - lacks the power to exert itself w/in the UK, so actually in this context it's weak too

8/

However, weakness doesn't mean irrelevance: no group is so weak it can be ignored, because the fragmented nature of Parliament right now means that there's lots of scope for working as a blocking minority

9/

With that in mind, we come to the collective action aspect: when everyone is weak, why should you be the one to give ground?

10/

This is compounded by the general feeling that compromise would lead to a much worse outcome to your original preference, so the costs to moving are high, while the existence of many grouplets means you can find a comfortable home you don't want to move away from

11/

Thus May sticks with WA because she thinks other haven't got a hope to negotiate a deal; no-dealers stick because they own the default; PVers stick because they have a strong case on legitimacy; Norwegians stick because they think it's a good compromise, etc, etc

12/

Of course, if no one moves then we remain blocked and heading to an outcome that the large majority don't want at all, which raises the incentive to compromise

But whose compromise?

13/

Without the answer to that Q, we'll not find a way forward from this.

/end