What's what?

This is probably the best way forward. The EU is also a potential loser in a no-deal. I doubt that the Conservatives have the necessary guts though. All those public school boys brought up to follow the rules and do as they are told.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/path-forward-after-parliame...

Yanis Varioufakis is an open borders shill.

This whole thing is a set up .....the powers that be will never consent to a reversal of any steps towards complete globalisation . May is doing all within her power to ensure Brexit fails.

Brexit is the pommy version of our own mass immigration globalisation masterplan. The encumbent residents know they’re getting shitcanned on the deal but the powerbrokers and their obsequious political class and media attempt to create the illusion that to resist their self interested orchestrations is to be either uneducated or racist or a slack jawed xenophobic inbred . A combination of all three is often implied.

People don’t want to see their homelands usurped to the whims of powerful forces. They just want to live their lives in the happy manner they’re accustomed to. This is not a position to be ashamed of and it does not diminish your character to admit to this.

So a no-deal Brexit, Blowin? Everyone loses for the foreseeable future that way. Maybe you would like to give us your thoughts on the Irish border, the meat industry, new tariff arrangements etc. ........ but probably not. Another spray in the general direction of anyone suggesting a policy not approved by the Blowmaster more likely.

Seems to me like the No Deal option is part of the rort. It’s palatable to no one and that’s why it’s been put forward. In order to justify anything but leaving. I’ve got no idea how they should extricate themselves from the EU. But if they don’t get unstuck from that web soon they’ll never be allowed to leave.

I honestly doubt they’ll be allowed to go anyway. The EU / globalisation project wont want to sustain too many nay votes.

I think if you went to Brussels tomorrow with a workable exit option that did not cause chaos with business in all the major European nations, you would be welcomed as a hero. You are actually very close to agreeing with Yanis. He is proposing that the UK stare down the EU to force them into an open ended negotiation. I agree with you that there are elements within the EU working to make Brexit as difficult as possible, but I think France and Germany, in particular, are more worried about the disruption to their own economies caused by a no-deal withdrawal. Yanis points out that this can be used to the UK's advantage in negotiating a better Brexit deal.

If the choice is between a conspiracy and a stuff up always go for the stuff up.

Forget what Brussels or the Germans of French are saying or doing.

The Brexit vote asked people to vote on the intangible, the smoke and mirrors illusion, the ill-defined nationalist lie and signifies negligence of the grandest scale by the Torys who agreed to put this question to a public vote. A grandest of failures of a democratically elected government who should have done what they were actually elected to do, that is, govern. The UK deserves a new general election now before Brexit.

Popularism is extremely dangerous as it presents itself as a credible alternative to proper democratic and legal processes/institutions, policy development and government. It has given us Brexit and Trump. Despite the best attempts from the reactionary right and the melon-heads north of Rockhampton we have once again ridden our golden luck and escaped this sewer entrapment.

If popularism is the answer what in god's earth is the question?

Nah , I believe there’s more involved than just the dollars to be made in the short term . I think there’s ideology that underpins the entire union. An ideology that’s beyond just the economics or the compromised possibility of armed conflict that a European Union presents.

It’s the ideology of a one world government. The EU was meant to be the example from which other regions followed in their respective unification, which preceded the uniting of the regional blocs into a single global entity ruled by bureaucrats at the behest of greater powers.

Yanis Varioufakis pictures himself imbedded into such a global bureaucracy due to his early adaptation of the concept . He is the enemy.

Everything possible will be done to prevent Brexit.

Bullshit.

Populism is a legitimate manifestation of the will of the population . It is the people demanding that they will be listened to . It is a clear message that representative democracy is failing heavily on the concept of representation.

People are sick and tired of electing politicians only to see them utterly ignore the wishes of the majority and to expect us to trust their “ expertise “ in good faith despite failure after failure , despite corruption and decisions made entirely for business and vested interests.

Populism is true democracy.

The West is getting run into the ground under the current misinterpretation of representative democracy and the people in the street are all too aware of the fact. And you’d still call them ignorant and uneducated for calling time on the shit sandwiches getting fed to us everyday.

You’re no doubt familiar with the definition of insanity ? Well it’s those who are rejecting the current path who are sane. To continue allowing the ruination of our countries to satisfy the Davos pole smokers is the insanity.

You can repeat that populism is invalid as often as you want , but you’ll never be correct.

There is little purity about democracy but it's the best we've got. Who said that? Churchill I think, or words to that effect.

Anyway, where is the truth in popularism as it has manifested itself in Brexit or Trump?

They’re the only options.....so far.

Just wait . Something better , someone GOOD , will come along and shine light into the shadows. A Luke Skywalker to lead the attempt at taking it to the Davos empire and their political Death Star.

Whoops , my apologies.....never go full nerd.

.... a legitimate manifestation of the will of the population? You have to be joking populist movements inevitably come unstuck if they gain power because they never agreed on anything beyond blaming the status quo, those in power, some nebulous "them" responsible for all evil. Name one populist movement that led to effective stable government.

I generally agree that populist parties don't tend to have solid achievable plans in place for if/when they come to power and also, in privileging majority rule, populists often erode tents of liberal democracy like minority rights and the separation of powers.

But I also think that non-elected populist parties can play a positive role.

Populism can shine a light on the weaknesses of existing political systems and can make clear which communities feel excluded from the mainstream, and it can expose the genuine failings of the status quo.

Considering that populism is a product not just of dysfunctional political institutions, but of the broader environment in which those institutions are embedded, populism as we know it is here to stay so we'd better be able to deal with it positively.

Name one Australian federal election in the last decade which has led to effective, stable government.

Australia is being sold down the river through increasing and increasingly bold corruption, deleterious policies and wholesale negligence by elected officials.

No Australian born person wants unfettered immigration levels . No right minded person wants our rivers run dry through greed or our prime soils being turned into Coal mines or fracked , no one believes we should be paying the highest prices in the world for our own energy or allowing multinational corporations who pay zero domestic tax to rape our country side and despoil our environment, no one who loves Australia wants to see our nation packaged and sold to unreciprocating foreign nations or see our homes become investment vehicles for cashed up strangers with no stake in our communities and therefore pricing out our own citizens.

Yet this is what our “ representative “ democracy has given us.

This is the situation that you’re defending. These are the circumstance you think will be improved with yet more corruption and yet more of the same unrepresentative democracy we currently endure.

Think how long the political class has managed to prevaricate and elude on the most basic tenets of our society. The same sex “ debate “ rolled on for decades against the will of the people. It doesn’t get any easier to manage than that issue yet they still fucked it up for years.

Fuck that.

Peoples plebiscites and referendums now .

Blowin, you have put so many words in my mouth, there is no room for anything else. Perhaps you would be better just going into a quiet corner and arguing with yourself, since what you claim are my opinions, are not, in fact, my opinions. Usual strategy...... when in doubt change the subject.

Andy I agree populist movements have a role to play. That usually being limited to getting something onto the political agenda. The problem beyond that is they are inevitably loose coalitions of people who share only one or two common concerns and so lack coherent policy. The validity of their concerns is not the issue, it's the inability to agree beyond that very narrow scope.

"The problem beyond that is they are inevitably loose coalitions of people who share only one or two common concerns and so lack coherent policy."

Blowin's got a fair point, the above statement could be applied to both of Australia's majors, who are comprehensively fucking this country over on many levels.

Personally I think they're too corrupt and the answer lies outside them.

Brexit sponsored by conservatives representing capital saying give the people a vote.
Trump, morally bankrupt capitalist and self appointed representative of the forgotten people.
Hanson, semi literate shallow racist claiming to be listening to her people.
Palmer, perennial litigant of business partners espousing a non-coherent mantra of free money (or something not really sure) presenting himself as a champion of the people.

Have we got to the stage where everything outside the "mainstream" is populist and to be ignored?

Wouldn't that suit the powers-that-be...

Don't think for a second that means I support Trump, Hanson or Palmer, let's be very clear.

Yeh, Nah Andy. They are coalitions but far from loose. They both have pretty clear ideological cores, have hung together for many decades and, yep it has been far from perfect, but they have clearly out performed the US and Europe on equality, social coherence and economic management. Environmental and Indigenous policies have been their great failings. Lots of other short comings but beware the baby in the bathwater before you wish them away.

Populism always has a point at some level even if it is only that a section of the population is pissed off. So they should never be ignored, just ask John Howard, he knew a few tricks about using populists.

No Guy .

That’s not populism.

That’s a protest vote against the inadequacies , failures and outright contemptuous corruption that is the political status quo throughout the Western nations.

Populism is the people having their say . Having their will be determinant in a decision making process.

Don’t confuse these postulating fuckwits with the forthright intelligence and instinctual ability of a literal majority of the population to find its common good.

I’m talking about government by plebiscite and referendum. Continuous consultation with the people affected by the decisions.

Before you start , please save me the bullshit about people not being smart enough or educated enough on policy to be trusted with controlling the direction of their own society. Better the trust should remain in the hands of the major party flunkies with their combative career ascent out of that shallowest and most turgid of talent pools that is the path to political power in Australia ?

You don’t think the people are bright enough to vote on whether they should attend to another farcical war in the Middle East or you want to leave the decision to John Howard ? You think that Tony Abbott would be more adept at choosing whether Australia should allow China to purchase huge tracts of our arable land for coal mining or do you think a collective application of Aussies would have a better outcome ?

Our governmental bodies aren’t the problem ,it’s the politicians who are between the will of the people and those who carry out the workings necessary to achieve the required outcome.

Representative politics has run its course. The status quo is the Rum Corps redux. Time to move on. Australia should take the lead in a non-violent global political revolution.

Incoherent policies BB, that was the point! The majors have the most ridiculous policies, that much is clear.

If you want to have any environment left in 50 years time, these guys need to do a 180 degree turn.

This country (and planet) is going to take a big hit either environmentally or economically or both.

If you think a major change in cultural direction is throwing the baby out with the bathwater, so be it, but it has to be done.

"...Time to move on. Australia should take the lead in a non-violent global political revolution."

Can't we indulge in just a little bit of violence?

I liked pammy's justification for a little fire torch here and a little rock throwing there.

Besides, no one listens unless you tear shit up a little bit...

"...Yeh, Nah Andy. They are coalitions but far from loose. They both have pretty clear ideological cores, have hung together for many decades and, yep it has been far from perfect, but they have clearly out performed the US and Europe on equality, social coherence and economic management."

I reckon you're kidding yourself there blindboy. The only thing that has 'outperformed' is australia's abundance of natural wealth, making life eaier, and politicians jobs a cakewalk. But the major parties you're praising so, are doing their damned best to sell it all off in a race to the bottom.

A race that's not benefitting current resident aussies of any description. In fact we're buying it back at a premium....'value added' I believe they call it...fukn mugs those aussies.

Populism is democracy by definition.

It's just that the internet has revealed to the high and mighty that they actually don't have the peoples backing, probably never did. That's why all this trump brexit shit is so shocking to only certain cohorts. Everyone else has seen it coming for a long time. A long long time.

But yes, whilst social media allowed the genie out of the bottle, finding coherent solutions is the hard part, as is clear with the yellow vesters.

Pretty sad how some just focus purely on short term economics and fear campaigns. Pretty 'right wing' actually.

As a wise bald man once said....better to die on your feet than to live on your knees...

"Populism is democracy by definition"

I always hear them banging on about populist politics on ABC radio and now here, and Ive always been confused because yes i thought democracy is popularism, popularism is democracy, I didn't think you could have one without the other?

Popularism is democracy

But they dropped a syllable and made populism. An all encompassing slur to be directed at the great unwashed when they don't vote the right way.

Like the other 'isms' it seems to be losing all power due to over use.

Either way, if populist politicians are voted in due to 'popularism'....that's democracy in action right there.

One of the few things that can unite the remain and Brexit camps is a mutual distrust of Corbyn, him being PM would be a disaster for the UK. And I would traditionally vote labour. Corbyn has taken the party so far to the left that it no longer represents much of the core vote. He's garnered support from the yoof through a canny use of social media and rightonism but most can see through the bullshit. Having said that I have previously sane friends I've known for 30 years who think he is the messiah, drawing portraits of him at weekends, bemoaning the media conspiracy to bring him down and firing up instantly at any criticism of Corbyn. This intolerance of dissent is typical of Corbyn's labour and has led to the deselection of labour councilors who question his policies across the country, the labour bully boys Momentum doing the ugly stuff and mobilising activists to vote the 'right' way. All MP's lie but there is something unsettling about the way Corbyn does it so blatantly and equally as worrying is the way his followers then defend him citing the greater good.
He recently called the PM a 'stupid woman' during PMQ's, it wasn't picked up by the mic but everyone saw it, you didn't need to be a lip reader to know what he said. But he just denied it, said he said 'stupid people'. There were claims of misogyny but most didn't think it was, he had a point. It was the bare faced lie quickly followed by claims of media conspiracy which was concerning. That and the fact that his supporters blindly echoed his statements.
He has form with this sort of denial, he initially denied he laid a wreath at the graves of some of the Palestinians responsible for the Munich Olympics massacre despite being photographed at the grave with a wreath. He later said 'I was present when it was laid. I don't think I was actually involved in it.'
Corbyn has built his career on protest, he hasn't had an original thought in his political life. Despite being in opposition against a Tory government ham strung by Brexit, weakened by division and with an unpopular leader reliant on a confidence and supply arrangement with the belligerent DUP, he still hasn't managed to persuade the electorate that he can do any better. The latest YouGov poll shows the Conservatives (43%) four points ahead of Labour (39%), the biggest lead since last years general election.
The fact that Corbyn doesn't have any clear policies doesn't help. He can oppose everything but suggest nothing. We still don't know what his position on Brexit actually is. We know he has never liked the imperialist EU but can't risk alienating Remain leaning Labour voters. Even today, after last nights confidence vote in parliament, Corbyn is stonewalling the PM who has opened up talks with party leaders to try and find a solution to the Brexit impasse. She has spoken to every other leader but Corbyn refuses unless no deal is taken off the table. He knows that talking to the PM would mean he would have to put his cards on the table and this is something he has avoided doing so far. So Corbyn for PM, no thanks.

Blindboy, I think we have enough technology at our disposal to avoid the need for a hard border. Vehicles, people and goods pass freely between Switzerland and EU member states without any need for checks. You drive past a camera and that's it, your in France. Obviously Switzerland has adopted various aspects of EU law to be able to participate in the single market without being a member state and while the UK situation is different its shows that a frictionless border is possible. The EU suggestion is to make the Irish Sea the border, thereby aligning Northern Ireland closer to the EU than the UK. The fact that this was even suggested shows how little regard the EU has for the future of the UK let alone all of the people of Northern Ireland. Total disregard for the Good Friday Agreement which put an end to 30 years of carnage. Its a slap in the face more than a legitimate proposal and in my opinion is designed to divide rather than unite. Conquering might be stretching things a little but it certainly isn't in the spirit of cooperation.
Farage is waiting in the wings, if a second referendum starts to look likely expect to see a lot more of him. There are some unlikely alliances forming around opposition to the May deal ie soft Brexit and a second referendum. Farage felt his work was done in achieving a leave vote but no one predicted the mandate would be so badly handled. Johnson likewise is still around and hasn't changed his opinion on leaving, he's lost some beef, preparing for a battle. Incidentally the Tory public school boy thing is a bit old hat, you know Corbyn's son is privately educated don't you? Not Corbyn's idea of course. The same one that is chief of staff to the Shadow Chancellor, hypocrisy and nepotism, traits of extremists right and left.
The idea that leave voters were sold an idea that was impossible to deliver is a bit yeah but nah as well. While it is a shambles, no one thought Brexit would be easy. Clearly I don't speak for everyone who voted leave and there are those who just wish Brexit would go away but I think many were prepared for a hard slog. After all pre referendum we were warned by the Remain camp and project fear that should leave prevail the economy would fall off a cliff leading to huge unemployment, food shortages, queues at ferry ports and airports etc etc. Remain really went all out and a lot of people were genuinely fearful, but they still voted leave anyway. We're prepared for a few years of hardship, a decade maybe, Its a necessary evil but it will be worth it. Of course non of the scaremongering came to pass and while we have social problems related to the governments austerity measures this has nothing to do with leaving the EU. Unemployment is actually at its lowest for years, the economy stable, borrowing low etc. Project fear has fired up again to warn us about the perils of no deal, the same shit really and again there are business leaders lining up to say that they aren't worried about it. WTO tariffs can be dealt with as can anything else that comes our way.

Well I hope you're right upnorth, not sure that the UDP are on side with the border arrangements you describe though. I have never found Corbyn inspiring. He comes over as a cold character, but he has managed to get some left wing policies back in the public eye, which is quite an achievement. So you reckon "no deal" is coming from the same people who brought us "Y2K"? Could be but I have my doubts. The EU can cause the UK a lot more bother than vice versa and the indications are pretty clear that is their intention. Here's hoping for the best. Lots of relatives over there!

So Blowin, are you going French style with the yellow vests when you hit the streets? Or maybe something more traditional, I think blue singlets and Blunstones might work. I mean all that anger, the nativist outrage at immigration and the terrible betrayal of the Aussie born right thinking types by these elite bloody intellectual wankers. Surely you are not just going to sit at home and vent on the Internet ....... are you?

Populism, isn't that when promises are made on things that cannot be delivered or just BS sold for election then carry on business as usual further enslaving the peasants and having them pay for tax cuts?

"..Populism, isn't that when promises are made on things that cannot be delivered or just BS sold for election then carry on business as usual further enslaving the peasants and having them pay for tax cuts?"

If you're referring to trump I reckon you're off track, because he certainly didn't "carry on business as usual". He's followed through on his promises more than any politician ever, or at least tried to...

Yeh he may have enslaved the peasants a little, but the tax cut is another promise he followed through on...be it for better or worse....

If you're referring to brexit, yes it's a bit of a dog's breakfast, but certain folk are trying to follow through. It's just the usual muppets trying to sabotage the will of the people...again.

Dangerous stuff I reckon. Those demanding a new referendum are playing with fire. From an unhappy camper point of view, and, the thinking the youth vote will cancel out the leave campaign. There's been a lot going on since the referendum, and I reckon the momentum has shifted to leave.

Not least because project fear has been shown to be full of shit. More shit than the follow theough on farage's brain fart.

Again, the left are the ones peddling fear, and they are the reactionaries. Apparently the devils work, and the domains of the right....until the left do it, then it's ok.

Good onya upnorth. Great little insights.

Corbyn has shown himself to be a bit of a fool covering up his 'stupid woman' comment. The video was a dead give away. He should have just owned it, though that's pretty hard to do in this everything's 'misogynist' climate....even if she was being a stupid woman.

And yep, corbyn is blatantly straddling both sides of fence because he doesn't want to isolate the labour remainers. It's amazing he's lasted this long without actually voicing an opinion.

He's starting to look as pathetic as oz labor and adani. You can only keep up the two faced bullshit for so long before you actually make a stance.

Sure there would be more to it than the solution I suggested but that arrangement would be very similar to the border between the UK and Ireland as it is now so the DUP shouldn't have much to worry about in terms of the Union. Its the EU who don't like that idea because they say they can't guarantee adequate checks on people and goods coming into Europe. Alright for Switzerland though. The EU can certainly cause us a lot of problems and this is an example of how they go about it. It just serves to harden the resolve of those who voted leave.
In many ways its a shame the EU isn't a more stable, secure and confident set up. If this was the case they could've just said see ya after the referendum result safe in the knowledge that the UK would be worse off on the outside. As it is they are paranoid that that the UK will actually be fine and that other pissed off member states of which there are a few will follow suit. As powerful as they are the EU project is never far away from collapse. Huge bailouts to Greece, Spain and Italy keep the show on the road but the loans are unsustainable, Greece in particular is a total basket case, in debt to the tune of around 320billion Euro, that's a lot of package holidays.
Many think Corbyn and Mcdonnell are actually quite dangerous. Based on the company they keep and the leaders they court the UK could look like Venezuela in a few years time. Then we really would have something to worry about.
I remember you saying you hailed from these parts Blindboy. Been pumping round Whitley Bay recently, unusual swell for the North Sea, 3-4ft @16 seconds and offshore weekend just gone, good times!

Yeh we stopped off at Whitley Bay this year upnorth. I lived there for a couple of years as a child. Walked up to St Mary's lighthouse, back to Spanish City and had lunch in the pub across the road. Given the time since I was last there, it really hadn't changed much. Still a nice part of the world. There was a small weak north swell but no-one surfing though we saw a couple cars with boards on top.

What's missing in politics today is good leadership. Make the difficult decisions and take the people with you "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
The bald guy should have said "better to live on your feet than to die on your knees" :)

Seems to be some confusion regarding terms utilised in this discussion. Maybe this can clear things up ?

Populism isn’t a politician exploiting the desires of a population to further their own careers - that is demagoguery. Populism is a term that refers to the will of the people where it conflicts with the attempted imposition of unwanted political direction as imposed by the political classes without any democratic mandate whatsoever. Populism is not a negative.

An opinion that Australia’s immigration rate is too high is not a right wing signifier. Unless that opinion is based on racial hatred.

The elite are not inherently intellectual. They just assume they are. Does repeatedly confusing a legitimate concern regarding the profound effects of millions of new people injected into a small country built on a fragile environment with overt racism sound like the work of intellectuals ?

No Blowin, perhaps not, but when the view is accompanied by nativist sentiments priveleging the opinions of those born in Australia over those of other citizens and includes phrases like "right thinking", suspicions of racism tend to arise.

Nativism includes established habitants , not just those born to a country.

nativism
/ˈneɪtɪvɪz(ə)m/Submit
noun
1.
US
the policy of protecting the interests of native-born or established inhabitants against those of immigrants.

Fancy directing Australian policy towards prioritising the interests of encumbent Australians over that of foreigners !

Racist , exclusive and bigoted ? Hardly . It’s called common sense.

And “ right thinking “ in the context I used it plainly means correct thinking.

You’re grasping a little bit , BB.

You can do better than that !

Anyway , the whole overprescribing of the racism accusation is so 2017 , BB. Surely the fake left has come up with some new material with which to salt the ground of any potential debate by now ?

"priveleging the opinions of those born in Australia over those of other citizens"

Christ almighty...

Well Blowin you directly referred to those born in Australia, implying their opinions carried greater weight.
And then of course there is the issue of who determines what is "Correct thinking"? You're starting to sound like a Stalinist Blowin. Who would have thought?

No mate , I correctly referred to the fact that those born in Australia have a different cultural mindset to those from more heavily populated nations.

Too a native born Aussie it’s plain as day that excessive immigration is altering the lived experience for most , whilst to a recent immigrant from Beijing the change is either not an issue as they’re used to living like a sardine, or they’ve never known Australia in any other fashion so they cant contrast it with the present situation.

As for correct thinking - the context was this - “No Australian born person wants unfettered immigration levels . No right minded person wants our rivers run dry through greed or our prime soils being turned into Coal mines or fracked “

Stalinist to state that we don’t want rivers run dry ?

Come on , mate ?

Are you drinking today ?

"Too a native born Aussie it’s plain as day that excessive immigration is altering the lived experience for most"

My mistake. I was wrong, turns out you just asserted the right to speak for every one born in Australia. Sounds like the kind of statement a Stalinist woud make. Deviationists not tolerated. Not to mention unbelievablely arrogant.

Hmmm.

Try realism , BB.

Or you don’t think that an extra 10 million people in 20 years has changed the face of Australia ?

Changing the subject again Blowin, it's a pretty poor tactic. Let's go back to why you feel you have the right to speak for everyone born in Australia. That was the concern I raised.

@upnorth, You lost me when you said Corbyn has taken Labor too far to the left ..... your fukn joking aren't you? What Corbyn is doing is approaching old fashion Labour centre left? Mate's Yorkshire brother-in-law was out here recently, he was telling me he always votes Tory but always voted Blair but only because he was more Tory than old Labor. Colours nailed to the mast old boy, showing you're of the right. Same here people whinging that Shorten and Labor is "leftist", statements like that and yours ignore the indisputable fact that both sides of politics moved to the right with the last 40 years of neo-liberalism.

@blowin, nah mate I actually agree with most of what you say by this plebiscite and referendum idea is all well and good in theory as long as it stays there. Could be used by pollies to sidestep responsibility when things go wrong like they do now with privatisation e.g. power/Liddell. What is needed is good government so lets start with total 100% transparency of all meetings between MPs and ministers and lobbyists (realtime online registers), we could even dictate that ministers must meet with the general public 50% of the time say, real time online political donations registers and federal and state ICACs with the most powerful investigative laws to investigate anything and everybody from the prime minister down to lowest public servant.

... a “mendacious, intellectually limited hustler.

Thinking Trump?

Read Mountbatten.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/sunday/brexit-ireland-empire....

"....Whether the imagined utopia of a dominant Great Britain prior to 1914 or a dominant America after 1945 ever actually existed is beside the point. In 2016, large numbers of citizens in both countries concluded that the solution to their complaints was to be found in reasserting national independence, with Britain breaking free of the EU and the United States severing entanglements that have cost plenty without delivering discernible benefits.

When similar assertions of the popular will occurred in other countries—the protesters flooding Tiananmen Square in 1989, the crowds in Red Square that helped defeat the attempted putsch of August 1991, the 2011 uprising known as the Arab Spring—British and American elites cheered. At such moments, they are all-in for democracy. Yet when the exercise of democracy at home yields outcomes likely to affect their interests adversely, they sing a different tune.

Politics is always fraught with hypocrisy. Yet the hypocrisy on daily display in London and Washington of late has become difficult to stomach. This is especially so when it emanates from quarters that otherwise do not hesitate to chastise other governments for failing to honor democratic principles.

In a recent op-ed denouncing Brexit, New York Times columnist Roger Cohen wrote, “A democracy that cannot change its mind is not a democracy.” Let’s unpack that. What Cohen really means is this: when a democracy comes to a decision of which I disapprove, there’s always room for a do-over, yet when decisions win my approval, they become permanent and irreversible....."

"...It is no doubt true that the United Kingdom and the United States are democracies, with the people allowed some say. But to be more precise, they are curated democracies, with members of an unelected elite policing the boundaries of acceptable opinion and excluding heretics. Members of this elite are, by their own estimation, guardians of truth and good sense. They know what is best.

But what if the elites get things wrong? What if the policies they promulgate produce grotesque inequality or lead to permanent war? Who then has the authority to disregard the guardians, if not the people themselves? How else will the elites come to recognize their folly and change course?"