Doughty defenders of democracy speak

A piece in the Guardian today from well-known peace-loving democrats M Hessletine, N Clegg -- and T Blair. Each of those alone is good value for consolidating Brexiteers' beliefs but together they are priceless. If only Bob Geldof could have signed up too.

It is the usual stuff attacking Brexiteers:

the fundamental importance of Britain’s integration into the European-wide economy and failed to explain the sacrifices that Brexit inevitably involves...[advocates of blind Brexit are either] naive optimists...who believe that once the UK is out, the EU will suddenly decide it is willing to overturn its legal and constitutional order to give us a licence to do what it likes about the customs union, the common commercial policy, and product and environmental standards inside an enduring relationship...[or]... cynical pessimists [seeking] the hardest of Brexits and believ[ing]it is worth agreeing to a flimsy, non-binding deal that gets them over the line in March 2019, because they know they could simply tear it up as soon as the UK is out. This would provide the pretext they have always wanted for their programme of extensive labour market deregulation and corporation tax cuts.

Thank goodness none of the trio themselves advocated labour market deregulation or corporation tax cuts! Thank goodness that none of them ever required sacrifices!

So I am a skilled politician but you are either a naive optimist or a cynical pessimist. At least this gives Brexiteers some standing as shrewd political operators not just liars or racists, but they are also accused of living 'in a fantasy land of denial. They believe that, sooner or later, the EU will capitulate'.

At this point the article gets a bit uncomfortable, and seems to think the EU might do just that. It warns the EU as well against opting for a blind Brexit, surely unnecessary if that is a fantasy:

For the European council, the temptation to concede a blindfold Brexit must be strong. Getting the British out of the EU and into the transitional period with the minimum of fuss and disruption might seem like a worthwhile goal, but it will not settle the Brexit question.... This would send a dangerous signal to the destructive populists inside the EU and to those who wished Europe ill. The precedent of leaving the EU with no arrangements in place for the future would now be set.

Surely only British racist and fantasists would want to leave the EU though, so who are the trio afraid of exactly? People who might vote out Macron? The EU needs their advice in this matter?There is the usual plea for a new referendum, offering some comfort for the EU to hang on.

Is there nothing more positive about Remaining that the three sages can offer to persuade us?

there can be no denying that a strong European Union will remain in the UK’s interests. Its ability to bring such a diverse group of states together and bind them under law and in support of human rights, free markets and free trade is a magnificent achievement and one that should never be sold short or undervalued... our [the three of them] support for democracy, the rule of law, free expression and free trade – are also fundamental European values and they are all worth defending.

Pretty abstract stuff, really. The magnificence of 'binding' different countries 'under law' depends entirely on who sets the laws, of course.Generally, it echoes a fading imperial notion, if not fantasy, of central dominance -- all empires claim all that. Support for human rights, free markets and free trade are also rather two-edged achievements if the whole thing is framed in that abstract neo-liberal framework of the 'four freedoms'.