Hope replaces dead horse with a camel -- the PVCV

Smart opinion seems to be rallying to the PV once more, at least in the form of the new revised (!) confirmatory vote (CV), a last chance if a deal is signed.

P Toynbee in the Grduania lays out a rather thin case:

A historic May-Corbyn peace pact? Hardly, and she knows it. Unless, that is, when May has finally run out of road she dares to go for a confirmatory vote because there is absolutely nothing else left....She will leave with no legacy [that imported American issue], her profound sense of Brexit duty unfulfilled and nothing but our three years of hell to show for it. Or in that last gasp, she could reach for one last chance by agreeing the Kyle-Wilson compromise – for Labour to nod through her deal but only with a final-say public vote....As the knock on her door tells Theresa May her time is up, let her look to her legacy. With her unsurpassed reputation as the most pitiful failure of a prime minister, she has less than nothing to lose. A public vote is her last chance to get any kind of deal through: she should seize it.

So -- a PVCV just to save May's legacy? Who is supposed to be persuaded by that?

Elsewhere, an old canard is released on to the pond for a paddle round, just in case we have to permit Farage to attract votes:

Party rows over racism reveal not only poor vetting, but also the shocking bigotry in society unleashed by Brexit 

In the familiar pattern of assertive headlines but thin weaselly argument, R Shabi, 'a writer and regular broadcast news commentator' says:

Few will have had the highest expectations of Nigel Farage’s latest vehicle, the Brexit party – or, indeed, of his old one, Ukip. But, for some, hopes were set higher with Change UK – where one candidate for the European election resigned after sexist and racist tweets he wrote were uncovered, while another did so just a day earlier, having made disparaging comments about Romanian people in 2017. Another of its candidates is accused of Islamophobia (though she has refuted this).

Then it gets a bit more technical:

You could put some of it down to incompetent or rushed vetting – especially for snap elections or unintended European elections. And it’s true that different racisms manifest in different ways in the left and right of politics. There are distinct reasons why Corbyn’s Labour is more susceptible to antisemitism and the Conservatives are dealing with complaints over Islamophobia. Still, while politics can influence social attitudes towards prejudice, it’s a two-way street. As Omar Khan, director at the Runnymede Trust, a race equality thinktank, points out, it’s not as though party candidates or members are creative in their prejudiced comments. “They don’t have random views about Jews or Muslims,” he told me. “They are the same tropes that were used hundreds of years ago.” The fact these tropes are so similar, so unoriginal, suggests they are drawn from an available supply; from society at large.  

So explore the origins of racism as ideology? No something easier:

Politics is no doubt [so we won't argue it] also reflecting the permissibility [deliciously 'woke']  that Brexit unleashed around [fashionably vague] prejudice – last year a UN special rapporteur said Brexit had made people “vulnerable to racial discrimination and intolerance”. [argument by {one} authority]. Bigoted sentiments may not be new, but they have been validated, mainlined and presented as reasonable [by whom exactly?] ...unconscious bias [the old standby] may also be failing to filter out prejudices in prospective candidates or current MPs – or just not to recognise a particular prejudice for what it is.

So --'unconscious bias'  or deliberately racist politics?

British politics has for decades been infused [weasel!] with hostility to migrants and Muslims, with both left and right governments pushing scapegoating narratives...Such attitudes have permeated our political culture, readily activated in a country with a history of colonialism and empire underpinned by racial superiority myths. On top of which, Brexit has veered Britain into the worrying politics of majoritarianism [blimey! JS Mill?] – it drives the relentless populist invocation of the “will of the people” to deliver an EU exit (which people and who gets to define that?). It’s no surprise [ie requires no evidence]  that this sort of politics stifles the championing of diversity and tolerance, and stunts battles against racism across the board. In this climate, it is small wonder [ditto] that minorities understand this hate as directed at different racialised groups interchangeably [So this misrecognition is entirely acceptable and understandable?]