Now the fight to leave the EU really starts

The Tory Executive has tweaked the Article 50 treaty in one place, and now there are positive noises from the EU. Michel Barnier (the EU’s Chief Negotiator), for example: “There is progress”. Jean-Claude Juncker (rent seeker by right of birth) talks about “positive advances”. Both sounded a note of caution – described in some places as scathing criticism, even though Brussels isn’t meant to be publically decrying Boris Johnson’s offer. Of course, there needs to be some indication of displeasure, given that the Irish border strawman that brought everyone to this crisis shouldn’t be seen to be too easy to dismantle. Not that the Democratic Unionist Party didn’t have a price. But now millions are promised to the province in a so-called New Deal for Northern Ireland. It’s to help boost economic growth, and definitely not a pay-off.

Delighted cooing is also to be heard from the so-called Tory European Research Group rebels. Rees-Mogg, who never fooled the author, took to Twitter to laud: “Boris’s brilliant backstop buster”. This is the moment that has been warned of elsewhere at FBEL when “the British Government… [impresses] upon Tory voters that the rebels in their party are happy to accommodate the plethora of other things wrong with the Article 50 deal… [so that they] accept everything on faith”. In fact, The Guardian reports an imminent outbreak of harmony across party lines:

Boris Johnson’s plan for an alternative to the backstop appeared to be edging towards a parliamentary majority on Wednesday night following expressions of support from a handful of Labour MPs, hardliners in the European Research Group (ERG) and the DUP.

Back in February 2017, it was explained in a lowly FBEL article how the Article 50 treaty would be got:

Let’s recap on what to expect to happen: a) the setting out of the EU’s position whereby there appears to be little or no flexibility, b) the creation of a scare that seemingly causes the UK Government to surrender to the EU, and then c) the UK Government being justified in the eyes of a nation when it signs up to a deal that is not in its best interests.

The scare in question, of course, can now be seen to have been the general trauma of the Article 50 process (which was never required), which would allow the Government to use its seemingly anti-Brexit arms to be seen to existentially threaten the prospect of leaving the EU, and inevitably thwart it. Over again, the issue has been covered at FBEL, where it has been styled the “engineering of tolerance of the Article 50 treaty”. Basically, the British public are supposed to feel that with Boris Johnson’s compromise – which is what he calls it himself – they will be let off at last from being abused; or as it was put hereabouts before:

Ultimately, of course, it is the public upon whom the pressure will come to bear, and there’s no doubt the plotters and connivers that hover on the borders between military intelligence and civilian government who are in charge of all this are hoping that the likes of Rees-Mogg are going to be given the go-ahead to finally go-along by an inundation of communications from tearful sheeple who can no longer stand the turmoil.

It was also put like this:

Of course, this stuff is also meant to impress the everyday Leave-voter, just mentioned, with an idea that he is somehow in a diminishing majority, and that the tide is turning, and that he just better jolly well go along with the flow, and let the likes of Rees Mogg and his pretend-rebel ilk off the hook so that they can vote to ratify an appalling international treaty that didn’t even need a war to impose.

Funnily enough, on the small matter of being able to read the tealeaves more than adequately enough so as to be sufficiently cognisant to rub a population of know-it-all-know-nothings up the wrong way, it was in a very a recent FBEL article that the author indicated that a deal was in the offing, and suggested that an extension beyond October 31st would be required. When the dust clears, that tail-end detail might be the only thing that the author will have got wrong: the Tories are very eager to “Get Brexit Done”, even though the EU is saying that it will take a request for an extension even if it’s not Johnson who makes one.

If the reader is feeling trepidatious about the opening of the Pandora’s Box that contains all the horrors of forever-EU undeadness, then remember that t’was always supposed to be. In March of this year, when the exit day had been discarded as snake oil by the Westminster politicians who had been selling it as a panacea, yours truly wrote the following:

The author always thought that at this stage, the Government would have had its sleeves rolled up, ready to embark upon a monumental job of heaping EU legislation onto British statute books. This fate has yet been postponed. The bad news is, however, the British Government has all the time in the world, and a stupefied public that will allow it an eternity.

At last the real battle to leave the EU begins. (Although, in fact, it actually started when the author joined it – at the time the Tories plainly indicated that there would not be the sort of Brexit that those who voted to leave had imagined).

It was never felt hereabouts that it would do much good to go into the fine details of what the Article 50 treaty would entail, because it is more devastating for Government when its subjects find themselves having been deceived into a situation that they do not approve of and do not want to be experiencing. Indeed, the abstract “Fake Brexit” – along with a few indicators – was all the fair warning that was required. Leave-voting Britons cannot say that they haven’t been warned.

Now, the reader will have noticed the psychological device used at the Tory Party Conference where anyone paying attention has been told that Brexit must be got done so that the Tory Executive can govern. This ambition was stated in a particular way: the Tories want more or better NHS, more or better police, and more or better schools. Unfortunately for the Tory Executive, or any other, there isn’t going to be business as usual in the Fake Brexit era, and it will find that people, from their enslaved perspective, instead of rallying around such electioneering mantra, will see the intent that is actually meant: population control for management of the sustainable socialised globalist state (the NHS), enforcement of the political agenda (the police), and inculcation of the same (schools).

Even in the days when the prospect of leaving the EU looked like something that wouldn’t happen unless there was economic catastrophe, those who were able to see it knew that more than the EU would have to be rolled back.  Thus it is to our limited advantage that, with the situation as it is about to stand, the obstacles to Britain being a free country can be associated with legacy EU control. The British Government, from local councils to the Queen herself, will be accusable as a facilitator – made worse because there is no necessity for that which is facilitated – and make itself contemptible and engender desire to see it redundant.

At FBEL, there has been a modest exposition of the way of doing things for throwing off a politically bankrupt government to make it redundant. There is no national party politics solution (and to cement this, there will be future FBEL articles on the clear deception that is the Brexit Party, and the not-what-it-seems nature of the well-established so-called constitutionalist movement and national political parties that that would generate). The idea that is actually dangerous for out-of-control government is one of withdrawing consent – which is to be done in two ways. The day is coming when there can be reports at FBEL about the author’s own experience in terms of one of these ways; for the time being, the focus in the reportage has mostly been on the other: withdrawal of consent by not voting. There is evidence that a phenomenon of this in 2019 by just enough people has already caused a headache for the Government so that it is wary of a General Election at this time because the desired result cannot be guaranteed – when the public don’t vote, and don’t do it for the party Government wants in the role of the Executive, then some other plans have to be made.

In FBEL articles to come, we will be looking at how recent refusal to vote has been problematic for Government, and how refusal can only grow in the Fake Brexit era. As previously stated, there won’t be business as usual.