Teresa May's Brexit Plan Fails by 230 Votes, Failing 432 Against, 202 in Favor

Both Brexiteers and Remainers joined forces to vote the plan down.

This was the worst defeat of a proposal put forth by the government in history.

There's a lurking suspicion that May and her cohort have deliberately negotiated such a terrible plan that they will wind up getting (they hope) what they wanted all along, a revote on Brexit in which Brexit is voted down.

The complete rejection of this plan tends to support that conspiracy theory.

With the clock ticking down to March 29, the date set in law for Brexit, the United Kingdom is now ensnared in the deepest political crisis in half a century as it grapples with how, or even whether, to exit the European project that it joined in 1973.

May's crushing loss, the first British parliamentary defeat of a treaty since 1864, marks the collapse of her two-year strategy of forging an amicable divorce with close ties to the EU after the March 29 exit.

"It is clear that the House does not support this deal, but tonight's vote tells us nothing about what it does support," May told parliament, moments after the result was announced.

"We need to confirm whether this government still enjoys the confidence of this House," May said.

There remains the possibility of a No-Deal Brexit, also called the "Hard Brexit," where Britain just leaves the EU without making any new agreements as far as the Irish border, trade, immigration status of UK citizens living in the EU and vice versa, and the 39 billion pound debt Britain supposedly owes the EU for the pleasure of having been the victim of it.

Sargon of Akkad makes the case that the No-Deal Brexit is preferable to any deal, because the EU needs and wants, for example, the 39 billion pounds it claims the UK "owes" it, and will become a lot more amenable to negotiation once it gets the sense that the UK is fine with just walking away and repudiating this alleged debt.

Only a few countries are net contributors to the EU as far as taxes; most are net recipients. Of the few countries which are net contributors, the UK is the second biggest (after Germany).

Without that 39 billion pounds from the UK, Germany, France, etc. will have to kick in more money to support the EU. Which means higher taxes.

Which will exacerbate the Yellow Jacket problem.

Which means that the UK has a stronger negotiating position than the media and establishment are telling the population.

That said, I don't think many Establishment types in the UK or anywhere else are comfortable making bold moves of any kind. They are cautious, cowardly types who cannot imagine doing something without having a bunch of their fellow cucks signing an agreement giving them permission to do it.

The British press is already painting a Hard Brexit as a Mad Max level apocalypse, claiming that because the UK imports a lot of beef and fish from the EU (specifically, mostly Ireland), therefore when the UK leaves the EU, it will have a massive beef and fish shortage, because it seems 1, you can't buy beef and fish from Ireland unless you're in the EU and 2, you can't buy beef and fish from any other country but Ireland.

So they're definitely making the case that unless May's (possibly deliberately) awful plan is passed, which it won't be, the UK must revote and reject Brexit or else WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE.

posted by Ace of Spades at 04:15 PM

| Access Comments