Where next?

It seems to be common ground that the government's withdrawal deal will hit the buffers early next week if the PM does not withdraw the proposal before then. Unprecedented times follow with all sorts of options as the Independent sets out.

We seem to have a choice between:

• No deal: chaos at ports, shortage of food and medicines, economic meltdown ... 
• The PM's deal - semi-permanent rule-taking with no say in the content of those rules unless we want to ditch Northern Ireland (who would be closely followed by Scotland) and a long-drawn out process of negotiation on a new trade agreement (which has not even started yet) 
• Norway (with as many pluses as you care to add) - which solves none of the migration problems and leaves us as a rule-taker ... lifebelt being thrown into the mix and likely to be rejected by Norway 
• Canada (ditto pluses and minuses) - which no one much understands 
• Remaining in the EU

And, to make things merry at Christmastime, there is no majority in either the country or parliament for any of them.

Fun eh?

Not that we know why we are doing it of course.

We are being told that 'we should get behind the PM to reflect the "will of the people"'.

As a democrat, should I change my views because the majority has said that they want to leave the EU or am I right to stick to my views and allow others to make the compromises?

If I do change my mind then who will make the case for remaining?

If I supported the deal, would I be merely colluding in declaring:

Isn't it grand! Isn't it fine! Look at the cut, the style, the line! 
The suit of clothes is altogether, but altogether it's altogether 
The most remarkable suit of clothes that I have ever seen. 
These eyes of mine at once determined 
The sleeves are velvet, the cape is ermine 
The hose are blue and the doublet is a lovely shade of green 
Somebody send for the Queen ... 
... who would then to dissolve parliament and make Theresa May dictator-for-life.

What are you for?

As we reach the climax - or is that nadir - of the government's attempt to get us all to sign up to their dodgy Brexit deal, a few wisps of sanity are wafting around. One came from a tweet, via the Guardian and asks:

Is it possible that I’m the only British person alive today that has no clue as to what we’re meant to be fighting for? I literally have no idea what you brexiters want.

I know what we’re meant to be against, but not one positive thing we’re meant to be striving towards in this new non European Britain. It seems to be something to do with Churchill but other than than not a clue. It also seems that as I don’t know what this shared dream is meant to be then somehow you believe I’m now a traitor, why?

So brexiters please tell us all what you’re for, what you want? What is this “control” you claim to want so badly? What is it control over?

I’m not sure you actually understand yourselves. I think it’s a feeling you’re craving, a feeling of control over a world that is passing you by. I don’t think it amounts to any more than that. You want our country to bend to feelings and that’s it. You’re after obtaining the intangible and ephemeral by dismantling the real and permanent.

So please brexiters if you want me to pronounce shibboleth can you please have the decency of saying it out loud first. Give me a clue as to what you want us to be?”

Raphael Behr picked up the theme a few days later, saying:

We conspired to hold a referendum on leaving the EU without a serious conversation about what the EU even is, let alone what it does. Then, a year later, we got through a general election campaign with little mention of Europe at all. Another year has passed and, despite the urgency of the article 50 clock running out, politics still manages to distract itself with arguments other than the only one worth having, which is this: given what we now know about Brexit that we didn’t know then, should we still do it?

Should we indeed?