I like Angela Rayner. See our latest article on her demise. As some who started life in a council house, who pulled myself up by my bootstraps, with a wife from Manchester, I identify with Angela’s straight talk on many things. I was therefore even more dismayed to hear her spinning myths and lies on LBC this week about Brexit. Angela came up with many of the Brexiteer arguments in this interview. Here are some of her ‘whoppers’.
The will of the people must be respected
Horseshit. We are fast approaching the point where 70% of people in Britain believe that Brexit has failed. Angela appears not understand that democracy is NOT a project. It is a process. She would not even be an MP if democracy were a project as women would not have a vote or be able to participate in society. We would be more like Saudi Arabia under Angela’s view of democracy.
We can’t just rejoin
Bollocks. Whilst it’s true that all takes time, the only thing preventing us from starting the process is a backbone in politics. Read our article on the matter at Byline Times.
I met with four Labour Councillors campaigning in my area on Sunday. All said they fundamentally disagreed with the exec. Are they prepared to do anything about it? Of course not. We need ‘different’ and not more of the same. What matters is the beginning of the journey, not the end point.
We can’t rejoin on the same terms
This was perhaps Angela’s cleverest deception. By not being specific, she allowed people to fill in the dots by themselves … for example “oh we’ll lose the pound, Shengen, pints”, and many other myths put forward by the Brexiteers. These feed the Labour project fear narrative and Angela should really know better.
It is true that Old Albion will need to learn some appropriate humility as part of the joining process, instead of the English exceptionalism which characterised the Brexit vote. However, it is unwise to place more constraints in the way of success than is necessary before negotiations begin. When I reflect on the conversation I observed with Barnier, I know that rejoining is possible. Yes, it will be difficult and everything will be on the table. If Britain decided that it must keep the pound for example, I’m sure it would be considered. Since all is a trade, the EU may come with some other things we may have to move on to keep the pound, perhaps in the finance domain, perhaps an asymmetric trade-off. For example, we have just seen concessions on Northern Ireland traded with changes to the Erasmus scheme. Nonetheless, what we must do is establish the principle of rejoining and political will to do so. Once that is secured, we must then leave the negotiators to do the work, as we did in the Brexit negotiations. See our book on Rejoining the EU.
I travel quite a bit on a bus. Upon boarding on Friday I was confronted by a man about 60 who was on his phone, swearing and shouting loudly at the front of the bus in the doorwell the driver. I sat down a few metres away and quickly noticed another man of similar age with his young grandchildren. The other man continued swearing and cursing foreigners. I spoke softly to him:
“Language Timothy, there are children present”.
He replied “Fucking muslamics and foriengers, fuck off c…nts – stop listening to my phone calls you fucking w…nker”. It was hard not to hear him for all the passengers on the bus as he was making sure everyone knew what he was saying! He moved towards me but then backed off.
There were about 15 people on the bus of all ages and races. I initially ignored his provocation and dropped eye contact, but he continued the abuse so I repeated my request. He raised his voice adding further racial abuse. Then the grandfather spoke to him saying that he had young children who were physically afraid by this time. He continued. A young nurse sitting opposite him behind the driver then asked him to be quiet. He moved towards her spewing more abuse and telling her to shut her mouth.
I decided this was enough and told him to stop abusing women and get off the bus. I was about to take further action when he decided to get off, still shouting foul abuse.
Farage Riots
This is what Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson and Brexit has brought to Britain. I had not been quick enough to record his shouting but felt the need to make a public apology on his behalf to all the other passengers on the bus. The response was quite remarkable from people of all colours and ages. It seemed that nobody wanted his racism in the community. I made a recording of this below:
If only he realised that Brexit Begat Boats and so on. but he was too thick to know anything, let alone the Dublin Agreement.
Inspired by this bizarre incident I formulated the Gammon English DNA test !! Provocative, but we must work inside their belief systems to reach them.
The only Brexit racist in the village
This is not an isolated incident where I live in Kent. Last week, I encountered an OAB (Old Age Brexiteer) on my bicycle with a union jack skirt caught shouting “F off Paki” to an Indian Sikh in Chatham. I intervened and later apologised to the Indian gentleman who said that the OAB couldn’t help himself and it was a problem of humanity. I replied that this did not make it agreeable or acceptable. Paradoxically, the OAB voted to make himself poorer via Brexit. Nigel and Boris “forgot” to mention this in the “sales pitch”. Let’s keep this in context. It was ONE old age man out of 67 million who claims to speak for all of us!!!! He does not
China Crisis
Even more disgusting is this example of a Chinese Restaurant in York:
Once again, the true spirit of Britain has come to counterbalance the knuckle dragging racists:
Brexit racists make a lot of noise (literally) but are a very small number. If this were a football match, the score on the bus would have been Multicultural Britain 15 : Racists 1. We must not be swayed by these thugs.
Farage Riots cost Britain dearly
The Farage Riots in 2024 cost £32 million. The 2025 ones probably a lot more. All money that will not be directed towards improving Britain. But the lowlifes who protest don’t understand that. Perhaps the rioters should be made to pay the bill? They certainly should not want to be receiving healthcare from forins …. We need a better Britain in a better Europe for a better World. Read our article on the subject. If you found this article useful, please support our work.
And finally, common sense
In a late entry after this was posted, please watch Zoe Gardner providing bucket loads of common sense on the subject of hotels, asylum seekers and disinformation:
For many years now, I have offered people an online leaders’ debate about Brexit and the notion of a better Britain as a means of helping them climb down from the Brexit mountain (all part of the Brexorcism process!). Whilst 1:1 personal encounters are largely positive and we even managed to broker a town hall meeting with a Labour MP from our activism, there is always more to do, so I offer the facility of an online debate to anyone who wishes to conduct a reasoned debate on what sort of country we wish to become.
Jools was captivated by the idea after he had started moaning about “illegals” on Rupert Lowe’s LinkedIn page. I asked him to write to me. He did. After a brief encounter below on e-mail, he admitted that he did not know much about politics and Brexit to proceed. This was a great shame, but I congratulated him for his candour and he went away reasonably happy that he had avoided the encounter …
Jools did not call and I considered the matter closed at that point … until, a few weeks later, he started spounting the same disinformation on LinkedIn again. Without realising it was the same person, I corrected him. The atmosphere changed and he started writing endless mails of personal abuse … here are a few … I especially like the fact that Jools entitled all of the mailings with the header SCUM 🙂 Reminded me of the man who called LBC just to shout at the interviewer recently. They are still angry about winning.
The death threat is funny. And the fact that Jools decided to buy my book just so he can add a bad review on Amazon is even funnier and just a bit sad … Quite literally, Brexit is an act of self harm. Jools is buying my book just so he can place a bad review on Amazon. It’s pure Alan Partridge !!
“Trade Spray” then felt he needed to enter the debate … 🙂 I am compelled to accept the title “big fanny” 🙂 He’s doing his best as they say.
What does this prove?
As I have demonstrated many times, online Brexorcisms are largely ineffective. See below for an extract from the book of Brexorcism on the problems of trying to change minds online.
A Brexorcism is a social process, NOT a social media process for the most part. The only things that work on social media are devices such as satire, comedic exaggeration, direct challenge, referral to the person’s networks and public humiliation as I sometimes practice on Linkedin. There is a consequential risk of emboldening the victim as they love nothing more than the ‘salty tears of Remoaners’ so each case must be judged on its merits. Too many people do this sort of thing to ‘win’ which is the wrong outcome.
Some people can only understand complex issues as being binary in nature i.e. left or right. For the record and Jools’ sanity, I’m not a lefty, communist, Starmer lover, homophobe, Putin lover, I don’t live in Dubai etc. 🙂
Jools seemed eventually to be frightened of being exposed. A little strange as he took the first step by contacting me and admitting some foibles and lack of knowledge.
Oh well …. keep working on them. I had a much better encounter on the street yesterday with an elderly woman who is worried about who might move into the street, claims to be a Christian, loves Trump, hates Trans, Woke people, wants freedom and the rule of law but wants judges jailed and international courts shut, and believes that there was a good Brexit out there somewhere but nobody could quite identify what it was ….
In the run up to the 2024 general election, I was told by numerous Labour voters and activists “Look, just vote Labour. It’s going to be alright. As soon as they get elected, they will end Brexit”. Although I did not believe them (and have been proved to be right), I agreed that the Tories needed to go. So I made sure thatmy election campaign did not harm Labour and then waited. I’m still waiting. In this article, I take a dispassionate view of Labour’s first year in power.
A good start marred by sheer incompetence
Labour got off to a good start, facing down “The Farage Riots” to great effect. It is to Labour’s actual decisions that I have the greatest issues. Decisions which barely touch the sides of our problems in Rebooting Britain, but which have generated so much heat and given the far right media so many easy wins. For example : The pensioners heating allowance last winter. Worth a measly £1.2 billion (Yes, I’d like to have £1.2 bn but it’s petty cash in the grand scheme of things). This generated so much heat for so little financial gain … in fact if the heat generated by public and media reaction had been stored we could have heated the whole country for several winters!! Worse still, Labour have now backtracked on it, long after the damage to the Labour brand has been done.
Death by 1000 Brexit ameliorations
Labour claim to have kept their Brexit red lines but in fact broken them in several areas. See Labour’s Red Lines. This has not gone unnoticed by Farage and the Alt Right Wing press. Even though Labour’s strategy on Europe amounts to “death by 1000 Brexit ameliorations” rather than more fundamental fixes, they have gained just as much damage to the Labour brand as if they had applied to Rejoin the EU. Brexit costs us £140 Billion every year in lost opportunity and taxes. This dwarfs the pensioners’ heating costs, PIP, social care etc.
Shameful behaviour
The PIP fiasco was yet another disastrous decision, presumably informed by the triumph of ideology over pragmatism and an adherence to the doctrines of Morgan McSweeney. On this subject, I find it hard to tell the difference between Starmer’s government and the Tories. I could go on about rollback on climate commitments, social care, toadying to Trump due to our Brexit weakness and Labour’s point blank refusal to provide safe routes for migrants, instead preferring to up the ante about undocumented migration, in order to pray at Nigel Farage’s fascist altar.
Sympathy for the devil?
Yes, we have had 14 years of managed decline via austerity on steroids amplified by Brexit, and most people do not understand how long it takes to turn the economic cycle round, so it’s slightly unfair to expect Labour to be able to waive magic wands on all the issues competing for their attention. However, there was no need for Labour to prey upon our most vulnerable citizens in order to look tough for a few knuckle dragging gammons in the so called red wall. There are plenty of other good choices to be made. There is no way Labour can discuss growth without confronting the Brexit elephant in the room. See our work in Somerset for the Labour MP there. Labour are also shamefully complicit in the genocide in Gaza and for trying to criminalise old age pensioners who use the word Palestine as part of civil protests.
Death by 1000 ameliorations is still death
We were asked to give an interview for Dubai TV in Arabic regarding the Kensington Treaty. This is an agreement between Chancellor Merz and Keir Starmer on defence and security, climate, economics, trade and STEM co-operation. Starmer chose to highlight the rather thin issue of some basic co-operation on migration control to appease Farage. Here is the raw interview. We simply need to apply to rejoin EU fullyto overcome the problems facing Brexit Britain. Death by 1000 Brexit ameliorations is still death, albeit a slow one.
To support our continuing work in mainstream media, provision of independent journalism via articles for various platforms, the upkeep of website and all running costs, please go to support us.
I wrote this song as a campaigning device to raise the issue of Scottish Independence on the agenda. Scotland did not vote for Brexit and therefore has a legitimate right to ask the question about independence again. The song (and film) are currently in draft form.
We need: A poem spoken across the introduction, with a female voice.
Male and female vocalists to sing the main lyrics.
A larger number of male and female vocalists to sing the refrains.
A bagpipe player.
A film maker to make some better promotional films.
A team of people to share the song when it is released so that we can reach far and wide.
Financial support to ensure that the song and film reach a wide audience.
This is a short story about the power of networking and connectivity. It took place over several weeks and involved at least 8 people from Swindon to Italy, Florida, Tunbridge Wells and Northern Ireland … It shows how “Parking on Red Lines” can sometimes be of value …
I was talking with Steve Rouse, leader of Swindon for Europe and instigator of “Dance Europa”. He explained how he had a difficult conversation with his Labour MP about their Brexit “red lines”. He pointed out that Labour can drop red lines on pretty much everything from Climate Change, but apparently not on Brexit. I popped that thought in my incubator … and shared it on our WhatsApp group.
Fast forward to our meeting at Reboot Britain. I was explaining Steve’s challenge to the team. Then Paul Cawthorne produced one of his famous lists on reasons why Labour’s red lines are seriously flawed … a little later and we get to the point that Labour have already broken its Brexit red lines on Gibraltar. If it can do this, it can apply to Rejoin the EU.
Although I am giving up on collaboration, I remain open to honouring great ideas when they come. I was compelled to make this one page summary (and Paul’s other meme) on red lines.
Parking on Red Lines
Send a letter with these graphics to MPs and share with influencers on social media.
Send a letter with these graphics to MPs and share with influencers on social media.
This story demonstrates the power of collaboration, joining the dots and why “Parking on red lines” matters. Thank you to the team for this. It’s a pity we cannot unify around the idea of Rejoining the EU. We still have as many formulations of what the problems are, what the obstacles are and what the end game is. Multiple perspectives on ends and means. These are typical characteristics of what I call “Wicked Problems“. Divergence on ends and means is at the heart of why we lose. The only good Brexit is a dead Brexit and the only good answer is to drop the red lines and apply to Rejoin.
Take Action – Park the Red lines
Write to your MP using these points above, the graphic and a copy of our book on Rejoining the EU. Having spent 32 years leveraging creativity, good ideas come from diverse connections and not from linear planning. Parking on red lines matters !!
Next steps – Remove Reform
I’m talking to Reform Watch today to see if we can join some more dots with our book on Brexorcism and our group “Fact Check Fash”. I recently had a letter from the Labour MP in Portishead explaining that they are holding a town hall meeting on Brexit following the lines of our suggestion for a national conversation on the matter in “A Better Britain“.
I’m also planning to stand for Council here in Medway to ensure Reform UK do not take hold in my area. Please support the campaign via Remove Reform UK.
I have long advocated the need for “Mass Brexorcisms” on an individual level, to heal the divides brought about by Brexit disinformation. I developed the proven methodology in our book Reboot Britain – Changing tired minds on Brexit. Sadly, my advice largely fell on deaf ears. Admittedly a “Brexorcism” requires vast supplies of skill, patience, empathy / UPR and time, lots of it, spread out over time, to be effective. But we must gradually talk people down from “Farage’s fictional mountains” of myths, mythinformation and downright lies. Brexorcism is therefore very effective but also very inefficient, as a way to change the minds of the masses.
Brexorcism summed up.
So, we must move from individuals to groups and whole communities. Although I have dealt with social groups, operating at scale for whole communities is not within our capacity. However, it IS within reach of political parties seeking to restore trust, truth and confidence in our politics. This will deflate the “dogwhistle” variant favoured by the populists and fantasists.
A National Conversation
To this end, I propose a nationwide series of town hall type events and a sustained campaign to restore truth and trust to politics. Better Britain events will combine notable speakers and experts with the crucial element of actually listening to the lived experience of those who would normally not get involved in politics via expertly facilitated small group sessions. In doing so, we will tease out a common vision of what would constitute a Better Britain. I’m under no illusions as to just how important it will be for this to be designed properly. I am available to help political parties do the necessary groundwork from my other side of life as a management / organisation and change consultant.
Who will do this?
I favour a coalition of progressive parties, such as the Lib Dems and Greens to engage communities. However, it it is clearly Labour and The Conservatives who have the most skin in the game to deal with people who believe that Reform UK is the only answer to our problems in Britain. We offer the idea to anyone who wishes to put an end to the populist rot that is infesting our nation.
Reboot Britain
If people wish to support a pilot scale event, to show the political parties what it looks like, I am happy to mount such an event with funding. Please go to Support Us, if you would like to see a better Britain.
I have written many times on the fragmentation of the Remain / Rejoin organisation and likened our movement to that of Indonesia (17 000 islands, many with just a few inhabitants etc.). For more detail on the OD issues, see Reasons to be Helplessand Indonesia. Last week I attended the so-called Brexit reset summit to meet a few colleagues. In passing, I made a trip down memory lane and it was good to catch up with a few friends. Although this will grate a little with some of you reading this, I was not impressed with the organisation of the event, save for the Three Million, who at least had thought about some level of coherence.
Shouting at the wind
Steve Bray dominated the protest with his SODEM fan club. It was the usual bad karaoke punctuated by occasional shouting. In case of doubt, I helped to start the street activism that became SODEM (Stand of Defiance European Movement – itself a two fingered salute to The European Movement). Some of you may therefore see my critique as being based on jealousy. It is not. The trouble with the SODEM protest is that it fails to provide any meaningful content or substance to journalists. Instead they use it as a colourful backdrop to their own stories, which is widely regarded as a joke by critics.
Photo backdrops may please those that appear in the pictures but it means that Remain still has no a credible voice in Mainstream Media – See objective 2 of our five goals. Where I live in Brexit Central, leave voters think that Steve Bray IS the sum total of our movement. It’s very hard to push back on this view.
Style and substance
Some Remainers still don’t understand the need to balance substance (content) with style (delivery). I made several attempts to get Steve a regular podcast with Jon Snow of Channel 4 some years back. I also gave several other suggestions to professionalise SODEM’s work, such as making the compilation video interviews. However, the C4 opportunity was disregarded out of hand and I (and Jon) were shouted down by the mob. Our protest at Parliament remains literally a one man show with a loud hailer and an amplifier. This is a far cry from the diverse and more inclusive offerings of previous incarnations.
Even Steve himself has done better. For example, when he used to intercept politicians with his Socratic questioning style. These were often deeply penetrating pieces rather than “shouting at the wind”. Whilst the loud hailer was amusing for a while, Steve’s act has not changed and it grates with professional journalists trying to do their job. Sadly, this is what many people see as our public face. We can and have done much better.
No more heroes
I’m told that Steve has made several millions from his protests. People love to support lone heroes and this satiates their own guilt, allowing them to do nothing. We have always needed distributed leadership and not heroic leadership – see the academic literature on these terms.
Pressure groups … not
I was astonished to see that the “real” European Movement made a claim on Linkedin that their own pressure had led to Keir Starmer’s reset. In fact, the elements in the so-called reset were included in the Labour 2024 Manifesto. Having once been a leader of an EM group, I’m afraid to say that they are not leaders, not even fast followers but laggards, in terms of being a pressure group. The leader of the Rejoin Party nailed the point:
“The purpose of a pressure group is to apply pressure, NOT to align themselves with one party’s manifesto commitments.”
Brendan Donnelly, former MEP.
Illogical incrementalism
It was Andrew Adonis, EM Chair, who sold the Remainers the false narrative of “step by step” aka logical incrementalism.
Hardly stretch targets. Just Labour Policy or opportunistic asks (defence).
Leadership is needed
I make these remarks in the hope that this prompts some continuous improvement in both areas. Labour will move only if they see considerable political advantage in doing so. Influence comes from both “push” and “pull” communications’ strategies. SODEM’s voice is an extreme form of push communications and is no longer very persuasive. EM’s voice does not push or pull our leaders to action at all, being totally in the pocket of their intended audience. “Creative tension” is always needed between leaders and their intended audience, rather than corrosive tension or no tension at all. See Peter Senge for more on creative tension and leadership of change.
Reset or Reboot and Rejoin?
It is clear that the only good Brexit reset is a dead Brexit. Read more by subscribing to our newsletter (free). Labour must find more courage. Rejoin won’t wait until 2032 as the damage of Brexit will be largely complete, much of it irreversible. The only piece of solace from the Brexit reset is the agreement to dynamic alignment. Still this is thin gruel. Starmer has managed to upset both ‘sides’ of the Brexit debate. Labour are banking on the belief that the Remainers are more forgiving. We shall see ….
This article in The Guardian is being shared widely by Rejoiners at the moment. It is a good piece of academic analysis. Yet I have some problems with a couple of the points it makes (I guess that’s unsurprising!!). It’s a long piece, so buckle yourself in for a long ride. Here’s what I really like about the piece:
Consonance
The article correctly states that the Brexit mindset is a complex interwoven set of beliefs (coalitions within coalitions) that keep getting reinforced by our populist media. I articulated this via my ‘Brexit Brain’ model below. Quite why I coined the phrase ‘Brexorcism‘ to describe the complex quasi-religious mindset change process in the book Reboot Britain.
“It’s really hard. We see tremendous stability over very long periods of time. A choice like Brexit provides endless stimuli to feed that brain activity. It’s coalitions within coalitions within coalitions…” Darren Schreiber.
The Brexit Brain – Read more by clicking the brain.
Thus, normal approaches to change management are not valid: ‘Carrots and sticks; are often used to change simple levels of behaviour and performance at work. For example, if you pay people more, they might work harder for a while. Put them under threat, they may also work harder, go on strike, work less or leave the company etc. But changing Kwasi-religious beliefs such as Brexit is a whole different ball game. It’s not a rational choice as the Guardian article rightly explains.
Whole brained change
I advocate a blend of so-called left (more analytical) and right brained (more emotional) thinking to reach deep into the Brexit psyche of my ‘clients’, what is known as a ‘hearts and minds’ approach in business consulting circles. Using hard hitting emotional headlines to grab people by the heart and longer more analytical approaches to ensure that their heads fall in line with their hearts. The dual approach is epitomised in the book Private Eyelines, a book targeted at leave voters to help them understand how they were lied to. p.s. DO NOT buy the book on Amazon. I get a £2.00 royalty on a sale of £32.99 for six months work, as Amazon keep all the profits! Whilst I don’t write books as an income source, I also don’t write them to boost Amazon’s profits. If you wish to buy a copy direct at an author’s discount, talk to me direct via reboot@brexitrage.com. By the way the left-right brain divide has been questioned but the idea of whole brain thinking (analytical and emotional) is a handy notion to help us think about the need to reach head and heart.
“A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.” Leon Festinger.
Another truism in the article is the belief that all leave voters are unresponsive to dialogue, thick or closed. This reveals itself in oft quoted statements by some Remainers, who say things like “You can’t educate pork”, “I’ve tried everything” and “They are thick as mince”. Truth be told, some Remainers lack the skills, patience and time to conduct effective Brexorcisms. Also it really matters who you choose as your ‘client’. There really is no point working on a ‘Nigel Farage type hardcore Brexiters’ but many leave voters are not hard leavers. Selection of your targets is key, both in terms of where they sit on the Remain – Leave continuum and to what extent they are key opinion formers for others who follow their views.
“When you pathologise the other side, there’s no point in reaching out to them” Brian Hughes.
Relationship and rapport is key
The article goes on to say something terribly important. “If there is a way through this, he suggests, it is to break down the myths of us and them.” A successful Brexorcism only operates on the basis of a strong relationship and a basic bond of trust. If you are going to challenge beliefs, you need a massive ‘bank balance’ of relationship power to succeed. This is why Steve Bray and his cult have changed very few minds by ‘shouting at people’ in Parliament, upsetting sympathetic media people into the process. In case of doubt, I started on the street with Steve at No 10 Vigil. He quickly spotted that the real action was at Parliament instead of Downing Street and set up a splinter group. Later on, I tried to gain him a permanent platform with other figures at Channel 4 News which he rejected. Of course, Steve’s activities outside the House of Commons have other functions. However, his finest moments were when he quietly but firmly ask politicians difficult questions using a Socratic style and a ‘servant leadership’ approach. But everything counts. We need to use all the therapeutic communication styles as discussed by John Heron in Reboot Britain. Social settings such as cafes, pubs etc. are often more helpful than formal settings, hence my comments about the sauna below, although the sauna is not the only environment in which you can change someone’s mind about Brexit!
In the article, Carol Tavris confirms the view that ‘consonance’ or rapport is vital as a starting point for a successful Brexorcism. The conversation is a healthy mixture of what Comms people call ‘pull’ and ‘push’ strategies or what musicians and psychologists call consonance and dissonance. Finding some common ground is extremely important or giving away trivial wins in order to build a connection. One of the difficulties I notice in some activists is their fundamentalist need to ‘win’ all the arguments with leave voters. It’s better to let them have some small wins in the dance of Brexorcism.
“When we argue with somebody about their beliefs, the absolute crucial thing to avoid is making them feel foolish. If you say something like, ‘How could you be so stupid?’, that will almost always make your listener become even more committed to their belief. If you say instead, ‘Well, many of my own expectations turned out not to be the case too’, that might be a place to start.”
Dissonance
The Guardian article suggests that we must fully convert people to become Rejoiners. This is akin to a religious conversion or what I call a 360-degree Brexorcism. This is fundamentally incorrect. All we need to deliver as a ‘MVP‘ (Minimum Viable Product” is to move people from the idea that Brexit is a good idea towards ambivalence or doubt about the value of Brexit, a 180-degree Brexorcism. This is a much easier task. This converts in behavioural terms to people not voting in another referendum / General Election to support a Brexit party or possibly voting for a pro-Rejoin party to balance out their previous vote. Obviously a full conversion to the cause would be a much stronger position but, as the article points out, it is much more difficult. This is like trying convert a moderate Christian to Islamic fundamentalism when we only need to go as far as agnosticism, not even atheism.
Our approach to Brexorcism has validation from low-profile approaches to change which were reported on by the BBC some while back. A Brexorcism blends ideas from psychology, sociology, anthropology and therapeutic interventions. People who tell me that you cannot change the minds of Brexit voters simply have not understood the fundamentals of Brexorcism which requires large doses of skill, patience and time. I’m offering a free masterclass on the topic for North Hertfordshire for Europe on Sunday November 19th at 5.00 pm via ZOOM. Contact me to reserve your place. I am also willing to give keynotes and masterclasses on our UK tour to develop a cadre of Brexorcists. This is vital if we are to move the dial faster on Brexit regret by a General Election.
.
Brexorcism
The will of the people has changed
My other major beef with the article is that it suggests that “though there is some anecdotal and polling evidence that there has been a shift in sentiment, and that remain might now prevail, the same polls show very little appetite to reopen the question.” This is incorrect on two levels:
There has been a seismic shift from 4% to 24% of people that believe that Brexit has failed. By 2024 it is quite feasible that 70% of people will believe that Brexit has failed. At that point politicians will no longer be able to look the other way.
Whilst it’s true that there is currently no appetite to reopen the Brexit question, this is merely a feature of where we have got to in the cycle. Also, of course, a sense of foreboding that another referendum would re-open all the family feeds / social angst and so on. However, another bloody referendum is not the only way to settle the matter. It is also quite certain that not opening up the difficult question will mean that the wounds of Brexit will remain with us for generations to come. Some kind of healing could actually take place with a grown-up recognition that Brexit has failed and that rejoining the EU is both possible and desirable. There is an embedded assumption that we MUST do this via a referendum. It ain’t necessarily so. See this article for London for Europe and Reboot Britain on the choices we face.
Myths and Riffs of Brexit
I note that the last remaining Brexiters are putting forward a number of myths to silence debate. Sadly some remainers also buy into these myths due to learned helplessness. For example:
‘Learned helplessness’ on the part of Remainers plays into a passive acceptance of the idea that Brexit is done and it cannot be undone. This is the belief that we don’t deserve to join anew as it might be considered anti-democratic etc. However, a referendum won through fraud, fake social media ads and which was judged illegal by the Supreme Court had it been mandatory is not the high-water mark of democracy. Leavers were not satisfied by a super majority (67.2% on a 64% turnout) in the initial referendum to join the EU in 1975. Nor should we.
Learned Helplessness summed up. We must not subscribe to it.
Indonesia– our structural deficit
Learned helplessness prevails in a vacuum of leadership and a lack of coherent strategy. Whilst the Remain movement was relatively united in the summer of 2019 after a number of victories, the 2019 election fragmented people again along political party lines. There are now as many proposals on how we rejoin as there are pundits. I describe the organisational structure of the Remain movement as being like Indonesia i.e. 17 000 islands and a few bigger ones. But all operating independently. The bigger beasts such as the European Movement compete with other actors such as Best for Britain. Others prefer to plough their own furrow. Some have been asleep at the wheel, calling for Remainers to make the most of Brexit. Yet, the only good Brexit is a dead Brexit. The consequence of being ‘Indonesia’ is that we find it hard to do things at scale. Fragmentation of strategy / structure and poor leadership also mean that we spend as much time arguing internally about strategy as we do in acting on Brexit and Rejoin. I set out five goals which we coalesce around on a monthly basis. It ain’t perfect but we do our best to provide clarity and collaborative leadership across a group of people from Europe. Join us some Mondays at 8 pm UK time via ZOOM. See also our article on Strategies to Join EU anew.
17 000 islands. A few bigger ones.
Five goals to join anew.
Not fade away
One specific point in the article which is not quite correct is the mention of BBC Question Time’s Brexit special event in Clacton. The journalist stated that the audience was made up entirely of those who voted leave. He went on to suggest that this was presumably to ensure the debate would not simply descend into an all-too familiar slanging match. We actually attended the event and talked with people on the street in Clacton. Levels of ‘Bregret’ were widespread in Brexity Clacton outside the event. They were also quite easy to get from people who realised that they had been taken for fools. The Brexit voting audience were also happy to speak with us after the event and many were of the view that Brexit had failed and that they were lied to. It is therefore a mistake to assume that all Brexiters attending BBC QT are now fully committed to Brexit.
This was mirrored in Brexit voting Deal the other week and on BBC Any Questions in Tory voting Southend on 17 August 2023, where the audience failed to applaud any of the statements made by the Tory panel member. Having been at the centre of some extreme nastiness by Brexiters, including the ex Met Policeman who issued threats of violence, spray painted my house and attended with a knife, I observe from Brexit voting Kent that the slanging matches have largely subsided. However, the article is correct when it infers that the products of Brexit won’t go away by not talking about it. See our Brexit iceberg below. Like it or loathe it, Brexit is the smelly dump and stain in the toilet bowel of life that won’t flush.
The Brexit Iceberg.
Brexit will continue to traumatise a generation if we do not burst the boil of Brexit one way or another. I believe in facing problems rather than sweeping them under political carpets. Labour in particular will be culpable for assisting the tragedy of Brexit if they continue to look away. Much in the way that the vast majority of good German people were silenced through fear during Hitler’s populist uprising. Fence sitting on Brexit is assent.
“The Tories will crow about Brexit being done. The Labour frontbench will solemnly observe that past tense, and avoid the B-word, as if it is a triggering trauma for the party and the country, best left undisturbed.”
Brexit is the smelly dump and stain in the toilet bowl of life that won’t flush
Lost consonance
As an aside, I found the opening paragraph about ‘Brexit hard man’ Steve Baker an unusual lead into the Guardian piece. I saw Mr Baker’s attempt to draw sympathy from the public to be a calculated attempt to humanise him as a piece of electioneering and not a window on his tortured Brexit soul. No decent Christian would agree with the human principles on which Brexit is founded. Like everything else with Brexit, it’s just another set of illusions. For example, The European Research Group (ERG) does no research. The weaponisation of asylum seekers to appeal to racists and people with feeble minds is not what Jesus would have done. and so on. Baker uses his faux Christianity as a shield and has now turned into a snowflake to gain sympathy from his constituents using the Brexit confessional box. Baker’s so called mental illness, beard growth and acne were mobilised as excuses. Krishnan Guru-Murphy’s analysis was correct when he pointed out that Baker was a C…nt.
Baker explained “I felt repugnant, hateful, to blame for all of the troubles that we had, absolutely without any joy, constantly worried about everything to the point of mental torment. A constant state of panic attacks and anxiety”. So he should, for all the pain he has inflicted on our children and those having anxiety, depression and lost careers / jobs / livelihoods due to Brexit. In fact, Baker should be in jail alongside Rees-Mogg who promised us cheap training shoes, Farage who promised a boom in fish and chips and Johnson who said that Brexit would make my wife’s breasts bigger. I’ve checked several times. They haven’t.
