By way of unconditional visa terms imposed by countries in unbalanced trade negotiations? Yes, that's what we all wanted.

Also, why do you equate Remain with multi cultural diversity? It was never my motivation as a Remainer. I was for free trade and the free movement of European labour, as well as being inside the tent while the world was becoming more unstable out of it, especially from the East.

In fact, how does being inside increase muti-cultural diversity? Remainers always did and continue to scoff at Brexiteers who thought that leaving the EU would address non EU immigration. Aside for some laws they didn't like - which have not been reversed despite a humungous parliamentary majority - where is the link?

And on those laws, could it be that the government has not scrapped them because every trade deal we seek to strike has easy visas as a condition and the very laws Brexiteers thought would be made to stop immigration and deport immigrants will act against those easy visas?

Interesting comment from Marr that the "imposed" ethnic diversity in media and advertising that drives us al insane is created by capitalists who see the way we are heading, and not the BBC or some woke Council etc.

White and American?

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

I know I am arguing from my own viewpoint, but to label Remainers as universally "progressive" is a mistake. Also, I think you have twisted at least the Remain agenda.

To criticize Brexiteers as largely "racist" does not mean that those criticizing are all inclusivity, multi-culturalist, wokes. They may be. They may not be. It is quite possible to despair at someone placing the X informed entirely by a desire to keep people of colour out of the UK when placing that X will do nothing of the sort... while, at the same time, advocating effective modes of stronger border control that might actually achieve that.

Quotas? I am willing to be educated here, but how many migrants have we taken in as part of some EU quota system? I am not talking genuine asylum seekers as no-one but the most rabidly anti immigrant would resist homing them. They are too small in number to be meaningful. I mean largely young, male, wholly economic migrants who are of vast number.

The courts and laws are protective of human rights and those have been exploited by those seeking to migrate here and elsewhere across the EU. So change them? No? That is a fault of government.

As EU members we could have advocated change of the law in light of the 2015 migrant crisis and would have been pushing at an open door had we tried; certainly now with the change in political colour across Europe. We didn't and now can't change what happens on the Continent. However, what is baffling is we have made no real attempt to make those changes here.

There are undoubtedly things we could have done unilaterally as EU members. Austria bans any non Austrians from buying in the Tyrol, for example, and Luxembourg is all but a closed shop.

And we could have properly resourced border control. Again, another thing we could have done without losing the benefit of being inside.

However, I think your attempt to distinguish immigration from border control is specious. Also, it was always a soft border for EU nationals and hard border for most non EU nationals. For the latter, what has changed?

In polls conducted at or around that time, the 2 far ahead topics on people's agenda was the NHS (as always) and immigration. It is the economy now, but then immigration was all there was on the media, especially with the issues and consequences of events in Libya etc. That is what got Brexit over the line.

You clearly didn't watch that Marr podcast. He said that non-white migration has increased under Brexit because we are forced to accept easy visas to negotiate trade deals. This would not have happened under the EU as we already had a trade deal with those countries and, anyway, would have had the collective strength to tell India and so on where to go.

Finally, of course part of the Remainer wants to see Brexit fail and for a return to an altered EU which has tighter borders, more restrictive laws on migration and places most emphasis on free trade and EU labour movement over more sovereign issues. However, another part of this Remainer understands the basic equation: Brexit fail = UK fail. What resident wants his own country to fail?

I am aware I am having a serious argument with a person whose MO is bon mots, but I simply couldn't resist rising to the points you made.

[Link]

Interesting watching this back - is any of it true?

I’d consider that an incredibly subjective take on what has transpired.

This is the reality of what Brexit looks like, regardless of whatever fantasy people thought they were voting for.

Because I don't agree with it.

The Leave campaign never presented a specific vision of what Brexit was or how it was going to work, so just because we didn't get whatever interpretation of Brexit you had yourself, I don't agree that means we didn't get Brexit.

Hannan's video I just linked and all of it's nonsense promises never once claims that this contingent on a specific version of Brexit or anything close to that. That has all been introduced after the fact to excuse away the fact that Brexit has not done hardly any of the good we were told it would do.

You think it hasn't done that because it's been 'strangled', I think it hasn't because it was a crock of s*** in the first place.

On top of that, Brexiters have delighted at the fact that 'Project Fear' apparently hasn't come to fruition - there are never any caveats about whether this is a true Brexit when those claims are made - when it suits Brexiters, we have had Brexit and the 'world hasn't ended' or whatever the line is.

Any good consequence = because of Brexit, Rule Britannia!

Any bad consequence = not because of Brexit / we didn't even get Brexit.