Guardian writer gets it right!

A good article in the Graun today by A Chakraborty that nearly got it right! He has been developing more and more marxist angles in his reporting (so has G Monbiot, who occasionally even talks about class divisions). Big moves for liberals!

Anyway, Chakkers says that behind all the hoo-hah and agonising, the British Government has been quietly advancing the agendas of international capitalism as if nothing has happened, so the whole schtick about Brexit neaning 'independence' is crap. Couldn't agree more. The point has always been to advance one small step at a time towards resistance, and for me, leaving the EU ws the first one -- but only the first one. We all have to watch out for attempts to push agendas in the name of the unrest caused by Brexit

The article says the Brexiteers will be very disappointed when they find they have not leapt into autonomy straight away but still remain in thrall to banks and globalised capital. Indeed they might, although I doubt if many were total utopian idiots. My hope is that further clarity will be sought -- the EU can no longer be blamed so who or what is reponsible?

Meanwhile, Paul Mason (same issue) attempts to discuss the latest example of Remainer Revenge Fantasy --automation will replace jobs. This has been floated for the last 45 years at least, to my knowledge, but it has resurfaced lately and linked to Brexit. Newsnight's creepy political correspondent was suppressing a sly smile when telling us last night that machinery will have to be developed to replace the cheap EU labour that does things like harvest fruit and veg. No Brit workers will benefit then! No doubt he is hoping mechanization will punish labour in general - and it will all be the fault of those wretched Brexiteers.

Mason flirts with an alternative scenario that mechanization will be good if it ends low-paid work. That reminds me of Ranciere on the enthusiasm of the French workers in the 1840s (and some members of the original Brit CP, to the annoyance of Marx'n'Engels) that mechanization will end unskilled dangerous and underpaid work and free up resources to pursue more liberating kinds.

The subtext, still undeveloped, is the crisis that excessive mechanization would bring if it led to even wider levels of poverty.

Still an awful long way to go for me and I have lilttle hope really -- but on the right lines.