[Quincy Lehr]

The difference, James, isn't that I like Putin (I don't), but that framing the breakdown of the post-Cold War neoliberal order as a problem, in the first instance, of national security plays into some of the most invidious assumptions of both the American Empire and the European Union's architects in which the main point is maintaining primacy--economic, military, or (in the U.S. especially) both. You know, the stuff that's rendering the entire planet uninhabitable.

[James Brancheau]

I'm not going to defend how the US and other countries handled things after the cold war. However, from either a guest on his show or in an article Fareed Zakaria had written, a convincing argument was made (well, convincing to me) that the west had not only mishandled the situation, but vastly underestimated the number of hardliners in the Russian government in the 90s. And that this significantly contributed to the situation we have now. Anyway, whether you'd agree with this or not, I'll leave it at that. For now, at least. Plus I think I've wandered off the thread's topic. As always.

[John Isbell]

Hardliner is an interesting word. My impression of Putin's goals for the West, which I believe are shared by a variety of Russian officials and citizens, is not that they want the return of Communism, as the word might imply. It is I think better expressed by this joke a Russian guy told me last year in Bulgaria.
A Frenchman, an American, and a Russian are discussing happiness. The Frenchman says "Happiness. You're on the Champs Elysees, a beautiful lady on your arm. You stop, have a wonderful meal with a fine wine, watching the sun set behind the Eiffel Tower. That's happiness." And the American says "No, no, no. Happiness. You're in L.A. It's a gorgeous afternoon. You get in your convertible, drive to Vegas, put five dollars down on the tables and walk out with a million bucks. That's happiness." And the Russian says, "You two have no idea about happiness. You're in Siberia. Minus forty degrees. It's 3 a.m. You're in the barracks. The door opens, an arctic blast blows in. The lieutenant, standing in the doorway, says 'Petrov! You're on duty!' And you are *not* Petrov."

Cheers,
John

[Jim Hayes]

The fall back situation for the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit is to apply WTO rules. WTO rules require custom controls where there is a variation in excise and tarriffs between trading partners.
Would that Boris Johnson were a buffoon, unfortunately he isn’t a buffoon, he was a very competent mayor of London, but he is a cad and serially dishonest. If he does manage to become leader of the Conservative Party then he will not survive the vote of confidence in the House required to become Prime Minister if he maintains a leave with no deal policy.
Expect him therefore to renege on whatever pledges he may offer in order to succeed May

[Daniel Recktenwald]

Quincy Lehr, I like what you've said in this thread. Points for having the courage to stick your head in the neo-liberal lion's mouth. (That said to Quincy, the point below digresses.)

I know it's way too simple to equate the American "MAGA" crowd with Brexiteers, but I was on the periphery of a discussion recently that mostly did just that. When I raised a finger, I tried to . . . certainly not defend or excuse bigotry, xenophobia, jingo-ism, and such like. I merely tried to suggest this: when Trump and Farage and other drum-beaters are out of the picture, there's still a beat that a large swath of our society is itching to dance and march to.

I put it in terms that the table of talkers immediately understood: "Even when the 'smart' people are back in charge, what to done about all our dumb people? I mean, by definition, there are fewer 'new' jobs in the New Economy-- that's why Business is shifting to them! When the fantasies of easy solutions fail to win elections, the question remains: What's going to happen to those left without a chair when the economic music stops?"

Without a trace of irony, and to a roar of approving laughter, one at the table said: "The Archie Bunkers of the world? Fuck 'em. They should have studied harder."

Another added, "Whattya mean our dumb people? The dumb are not my people. I've worked pretty hard to show that . . . ."

[Jim Moonan]

Yup, what Daniel said.

[John Isbell]

Hmm. I have a thought or two, but will limit myself to agreeing with the phrase "Whattya mean our dumb people?"
Dumb people, like anybody else, I hope, don't belong to anybody, they are free and independent agents. As the old saying goes, "The people have voted - the bastards!"

Cheers,
John

[Max Goodman]

Thanks to all for participating and particularly to Matt and Jim H. for the direct answers to my question. I guess one reason I'm confused is that there isn't a clear answer. If both Matt and Jim are right, the UK's fall back plan is to impose custom controls (per WTO rules) without a border.

(It seems more complicated than my original fear, that Johnson was tacitly threatening that the only way for the EU to avoid violence was to sweeten the Brexit deal.)

I don't suppose this is a very original observation, but the situation must really cheer those who oppose democracy by showing how incoherent can be a decision made collectively. (In the U.S., we're doing our bit to support democracy by proving that empowering a single decision maker is no guarantee of coherence.)

[John Isbell]

Max: "the situation must really cheer those who oppose democracy by showing how incoherent can be a decision made collectively."

I suspect that Putin these days goes to bed every night happy.

Cheers,
John

[Jim Hayes]

What is sometimes forgotten Max is that Brexit is almost wholly an English phenomenon. Both Scotland and Northern Ireland rejected it with sizable majorities, reinforced by results in the recent European parliamentary elections.
The net result of a no deal exit which would include Scotland and Northern Ireland
would be fiercely resisted and would lead to the end of Mrs May’s ‘cherished union’
All right the DUP would tag along but they’re in a minority’s and are more of a cult than a political party.

Jim