Thread by @rolandmcs

It can be perplexing that leading Brexiters still don't grasp the detail and/or continuously lie about it.
Why do they do that?
Thread... /1

A common suggestion or inference is that Brexit leaders are thick. But this doesn't compute. Brexit leaders often have good degrees, perhaps from august universities, so are clearly intelligent. /2

Another suggestion is that Brexit leaders are now so committed to Brexit (sometimes over decades) that they could never admit the detail doesn't really work or that they missed a crucial bit. I think this is much closer to the truth, but there's something else... /3

Recall that Brexiters are poor at policy (the detail) but quite good at politics (simple slogans/narratives).
In tune with that predisposition, they believe that ultimately politics will intervene in this (despite what the EU says now) and will force a reasonable deal. /4

They calculate that Britain is too big an economy and global player to be ignored. Put a different way, a 'No Deal' could become seen as the tipping point for a global recession; perhaps a revival of instability in the Eurozone. /5

'No Deal' could thus drive continental populism. In 2030, Brexiters surmise, we could all be looking back wondering why the EU allowed such a geopolitical event by standing on rigid legalities, rather than waking up to the realpolitik. /6

Incidentally this also plays right into the idea that the EU is detached from politics (aka 'the people') and is instead an effectively-uncontrollable legal & regulatory monster with its own ever-closer-union momentum and dynamics. A No Deal outcome could 'prove this'. /7

Now then, you and I can pick holes in this whole standpoint, but Brexit leaders are putting down the roots of this narrative now. They need to firstly seed the idea/'proof' of a detached, unpragmatic EU standing on obscure legalities. /8

And secondly, they need to just get closER to correct explantations of the detail. It will still be wrong, but it may narrow the gap over which the politics that they think will eventually kick in has to stretch. There's some evidence of this.

https://twitter.com/CoppetainPU/status/1142411858097430530?s=19

/9

The eagle-eyed will notice that this narrative is a more nuanced version of "They need us more than we need them". Translated, this phrase actually says "We ARE going through with this and you, EU, need to stop with the legalese & technicians and engage on the politics." /10

It's why Brexiters stress belief in Brexit - the EU needs to know the UK is totally serious about leaving.
It's why they want the UK to be talking politics with the EU27 (esp Merkel), not just the technicians at the Commission.
It's why they resent technicians like Robbins. /11

To them, technicians (civil servants) will only get so far and will probably go in the wrong direction anyway. "Politics will out". Civil servants will know their place or be fired. /12

This is why those who say "there'll be no end to this" have a point - Brexiters will just blame the EU and domestic non-believers for a 'crash'. /13

But many voters are watching this today from a comfy chair, with a drink, a job, financial stability and nationally low unemployment. A huge number of individual perspectives could shift when the abstract of Brexit is replaced by the reality. /ends

PS: Thanks to @dg_davies & @DefaidTexel for noting that on #bbcaq yesterday, David Davis argued this exact point that politics would intervene: "In the EU, the law matters until the forces of economics or other political forces overwhelm them." From 34:52

bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0…

PPS: Liz Truss also hinting that politics will eventually intervene, but right now "they would say that wouldn't they".

https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1142723005228945408

This is an example of Remain-inclined "legalese" meeting Leave-inclined "politics will intervene".