,
6 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
the reason I feel, in the phrase "politically homeless" right now, is that I think "do you give ground on Brexit to gain ground on austerity?" is a *difficult* question, both ethically and practically. Everyone seems to think it's simple...
...it's just like everyone had a really simple solution to the Eurocrisis, usually involving something that would risk political chaos and disaster elsewhere in the system{1} and assumed the only reason it wasn't being implemented was evil or superstition...
{1} usually involving a massive coup de grace on debt levels and a hit to the German fisc that could have tipped the balance in Karlsruhe and blown up the entire post-Draghi-speech QE structure.
Basically *everything* is a massive risk right now, and all of them are risks I'd rather not take. If a compromise solution could be achieved without an election, at the cost of blowing up the Labour Party electorally, I'd say do it.
(as you can tell from the above, I'm not at all convinced by either "Labour would be on 50% if they just endorsed a People's Vote" or "Brexit would be much worse for the worst off than another Tory government", the two ways of squaring the circle)
I'm certainly open to arguments that Jeremy Corbyn is, personally, himself, the problem, although I have not yet seen one such that gets over the "compared to who?" issue.
