1. Exquisite Tweets from @chrisgreybrexit, @t0nyyates, @zatapatique, @tomashirstecon, @djmgaffneyw4

    PreoccupationsCollected by Preoccupations

    This is a very good piece from @lewis_goodall but a conclusion might be that since doing Brexit, however it's done, or not doing it, will all lead to a populist backlash then we might as well avoid the damage of doing it since we're going to get the backlash anyway

    Lewis Goodall @
    The referendum wasn’t our real populist revolt. That is probably yet to come. Even if a deal is agreed between May and Corbyn-especially if it’s agreed- this is only the beginning. My piece. news.sky.com/story/trumpism…

    Reply Retweet Like

    chrisgreybrexit

    Chris Grey

  2. More than that - once we cut loose we lose the instiutional anchor of the EU's restrictions. Meaning any surge of populist feeling gets manifest more in actual policies.

    Chris Grey @lewis_goodall but a conclusion might be that since doing Brexit, however it's done, or not doing it, will all lead to a populist backlash then we might as well avoid the damage of doing it since we're going to get the backlash anyway

    Reply Retweet Like

    t0nyyates

    Tony Yates

  3. (without prejudice as to whether that's a good or a bad thing)

    Reply Retweet Like

    zatapatique

    zatapatique

  4. Sovereignty means no longer being able to blame the other for not fully representing views of the base in policy platform

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

    (Also, I have no idea why people feel obliged to insert the polite caveat about the piece - it’s really not very good IMO)

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

  5. contra this, I do think our mutuals are too dismissive of it, as the simple fact of the piece's existence can not just be wished away

    Reply Retweet Like

    zatapatique

    zatapatique

  6. The piece itself being an example of the underlying problem I can get on board with. But precisely this lack of self-awareness is what makes me critique its content. It is, arguably, paving way to the same "but we have to address these people's concerns" space we have worried abt

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

  7. It just oozes that from every sentence. And with a heady mix of 'unlike your regular journalist I have not got my head in the Westminster bubble', but actually in a funny way seems to illustrate precisely the opposite.

    Reply Retweet Like

    t0nyyates

    Tony Yates

  8. my point is more that Only Some People Are Real is instructive, and I don't see it receding any time soon, so that piece is in a way correct, even if it obviously participates in it

    Reply Retweet Like

    zatapatique

    zatapatique

  9. Not correct in the stakes it sets out since we've seen some evidence of the relative size of the "revolt" in the London marches. So even if it's a pervasive narrative, I don't think accepting the terms of debate as correct makes sense to me.

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

    Happy to say "this is a BFD of how people are trying to bounce us into acceptance with mix of fear of backlash, faux admiration for tactical genius of our opponent, & crude political triangulation" w/out ceding an inch tht the analysis itself is anything other than rank hyperbole

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

  10. precisely. the actual reality of the threat matters less than how the perception of it affects outcomes and the article is evidence of it IMO, even if involuntary

    Reply Retweet Like

    zatapatique

    zatapatique

    a very meta perspective maybe, but on the other hand, the insistence that "it is not true" clouds the mind to what is happening

    Reply Retweet Like

    zatapatique

    zatapatique

  11. Glad to see I wasn't the only one with reservations about that piece. The hypothesis that never seems to get aired is 'Maybe most people aren't that angry at all and even the ones who are are exaggerating.'

    Reply Retweet Like

    djmgaffneyw4

    Declan Gaffney

  12. It’s more, not going at it for misrepresentation of the stakes or, worse, inserting caveat of “it’s good but” as the QT did at the top of the thread leaves the field wide open for more of this. Needs to be called each and every time.

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

  13. i'm saying the anger is not real, OK maybe, but then again the "without a single bullet being fired" guy kinda leads in the polls, and candidates making rape jokes in the open

    Reply Retweet Like

    zatapatique

    zatapatique

  14. Some of it's real perhaps (albeit directed at imaginary targets), much of it is self-stimulated and a great deal of it is performative I think. But The Discourse over-indulges the performative stuff for the narrative values.

    Reply Retweet Like

    djmgaffneyw4

    Declan Gaffney

  15. Yep, and because we feel the author’s ultimate sympathies broadly align with ours we indulge the flight of fancy - and we shouldn’t. It’s profoundly unhelpful.

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

  16. I realize I may have wrongly come off as "this is good actually" rather than "this is instructive, if in a self revealing way"

    Reply Retweet Like

    zatapatique

    zatapatique

  17. Neither did I. Only wanted to clarify that I wasn't just saying "this is incorrect" but also "this is wrong in that it both misrepresents the stakes & that in doing so it indulges an insidious narrative that should be called out"

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomashirstecon

    Tomas Hirst

  18. Exactly this. Analogy; journalism purporting to educate, about crime and its causes and consequences, but actually is just about telling lurid stories with titilating gory details, regardless of the consequences for those closely involved.

    Reply Retweet Like

    t0nyyates

    Tony Yates