1049 Bankers and Trotskyists unite to stop Hard Brexit

Bankers and Trotskyists unite to stop Hard Brexit

Newsletter published on August 30, 2019

(1) Bankers, Trotskyists and Anarchists unite to stop Hard Brexit
(2) Economist proposes plans for MPs to block a no-deal Brexit
(3) Economist Editorial: MPs must act now to stop Johnson’s no-deal Brexit
(4) Soros' Project Syndicate proposes ways to beat Johnson's 'Coup'
(Anatole Kaletsky)
(5) Told of Corporate opposition to Hard Brexit, Johnson replied: "Fuck
Business"
(6) Labour hard left threatens Shutdown - blockading bridges and  roads
- to stop Hard Brexit
(7) Global Justice & Red Pepper nationwide protests 'to defend democracy
and #StopTheCoup'
(8) Socialist Worker Trots call for Mass Strikes to kick Johnson out

(1) Bankers, Trotskyists and Anarchists unite to stop Hard Brexit
- by Peter Myers, August 30, 2019

By 'bankers', I refer to Lord Rothschild, owner of The Economist, and
George Soros, owner of the website Project Syndicate.

Soros is not just a speculator on the stock exchange, but a money-lender
- a banker. He and Rothschild seem to operate in cahoots; and often
propote causes favoured by Trotskyists.

By 'Trotskyists and Anarchists', I refer to Momentum, Global Justice,
Red Pepper, Socialist Worker and the like, who are calling for strikes
and a blockade to shut down the economy.

They call Johnson's actions 'undemocratic', forgetting that the Leave
camp won the Brexit Referendum. Further, the Working Class - their
supposed constituency - voted to Leave. It was the Greens and the City
of London who voted Remain. But, of course, Trots and Anarchists are
mainly intellectuals, not workers.

(2) Economist proposes plans for MPs to block a no-deal Brexit

https://www.economist.com/britain/2019/08/29/boris-johnson-suspends-parliament-causing-uproar

Taking back control

Boris Johnson suspends Parliament, causing uproar

As MPs plan to block a no-deal Brexit, the government plans to send them
home

Print edition | Britain

Aug 29th 2019

The pressure is rising in the battle between Boris Johnson, who is
determined to lead Britain out of the European Union with or without a
deal on October 31st, and Parliament, where a majority of mps want to
stop a no-deal Brexit. This week opposition parties agreed that, when
the Commons returns on September 3rd, they will try to hijack its agenda
to pass a law calling for another extension of the Brexit deadline. But
a day later Mr Johnson trumped them by announcing a long suspension of
Parliament, from September 11th to October 14th, when a Queen’s Speech
will start a new session.

The prime minister claimed this was a normal way for a new government to
set out its plans on crime, health and so on. Yet his main goal is the
cynical one of shortening the time for mps to stop no-deal. At almost
five weeks, it will be Parliament’s longest suspension before a Queen’s
Speech since 1945. The response was apoplectic. Jeremy Corbyn, Labour’s
leader, labelled the move a "smash and grab on our democracy". The
Commons Speaker, John Bercow, called it a "constitutional outrage". Even
many Tories were unhappy. Ruth Davidson, the party’s popular leader in
Scotland and a long-standing critic of Mr Johnson, quit the next day.

The oddity is that a week earlier Mr Johnson was speaking of progress
towards a Brexit deal. He had junked his vow not even to talk to fellow
Europeans until they dropped the Irish backstop, an insurance policy to
avert a hard border in Ireland by keeping the entire United Kingdom in a
customs union with the eu. Instead, after meeting Germany’s Angela
Merkel and France’s Emmanuel Macron, he offered to propose an
alternative to the backstop within 30 days. Upsetting hardline
Brexiteers, he also said he would not seek other changes to the
withdrawal agreement negotiated by Theresa May, his predecessor. [...]

The impact on the British economy, which is already teetering near
recession, could indeed be severe. The government’s leaked "Operation
Yellowhammer" analysis talks of possible shortages of fresh food,
medicine and petrol, disruption to ports and the risk of civil unrest,
especially in Northern Ireland, where trade across the border could be
severely hampered. Manufacturers fret about the effect on just-in-time
supply chains of tariffs and non-tariff barriers. Farmers and fishers
are worried about duties on sheep, beef and fish exports. Service
businesses and the nhs talk of recruitment problems.

Brexiteers dismiss this as another "Project Fear", like the prophecies
of doom before the June 2016 referendum which turned out to be too
gloomy. They concede that there could be bumps in the road. But they
also claim that no-deal would end uncertainty for businesses, be
harmoniously managed by all sides and lead quickly to a new free-trade
deal with the eu.

As Charles Grant of the Centre for European Reform, a think-tank, notes,
the chaos around no-deal would in fact maximise the uncertainty for
businesses. Far from being harmonious, it would be acrimonious,
especially since Mr Johnson says he would not pay the full £39bn ($48bn)
Brexit bill accepted by Mrs May. And an early trade deal looks
far-fetched. The eu would insist on the Brexit bill, protection of eu
citizens’ rights and an Irish backstop as prerequisites. Any talks would
be on a different legal basis from Article 50, which governs the current
negotiations, requiring a fresh negotiating mandate, the unanimous
approval of eu governments and ratification by national and regional
parliaments.

Given this, most mps are understandably against no-deal. But can they
stop it happening? Next week they will return to work after days of
feverish exchanges over what to do. They are helped by the fact that Mr
Bercow seems determined to exploit all his power as Speaker to give mps
a say, and that Mr Johnson has a Commons majority of just one. Yet they
know that no-deal is the default option in the absence of other action
and that, thanks to Mr Johnson’s suspension of Parliament, time is
short. Many concede that no-deal Brexiteers are better organised and
more ruthless than their opponents.

Maddy Thimont Jack of the Institute for Government, another think-tank,
reckons mps have just enough time to legislate, if they remain united.
The plan is to ask Mr Bercow for an emergency debate under standing
order 24 and use this to follow the precedent of the Cooper-Letwin bill
that was passed in March. Back then, mps took control of the Commons
agenda for a day to bring in the bill, which required the prime minister
to request an extension of the original Brexit deadline of March 29th.
mps might also need to suspend standing order 48, which says only a
minister may propose acts costing public money.

Ms Thimont Jack notes that the March bill became law in less than five
days. But that was partly because Mrs May chose not to obstruct it. Even
if a similar bill passes the Commons in a single day, as then, it is
hard to break a filibuster in the Lords, where the timetable for debate
is less easily curtailed. Another problem is that any law can require Mr
Johnson only to ask for an extension. He might do so on terms that allow
him to refuse any offer from the eu, though Brussels is keen to avoid
any blame for a no-deal Brexit.

These uncertainties make some mps keen to consider a vote of no
confidence in Mr Johnson’s government. But that, too, is fraught with
difficulties (see article). So are such options as trying to revoke the
Article 50 Brexit application, for which there is much less support in
Parliament. The harsh truth is that, although majorities of both mps and
voters are against a no-deal Brexit, an idea not even floated by
Brexiteers during the referendum campaign, the timetable makes it tricky
to stop, however much Parliament tries.?

This article appeared in the Britain section of the print edition under
the headline "Prime minister v Parliament"

(3) Economist Editorial: MPs must act now to stop Johnson’s no-deal Brexit

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/08/29/how-parliament-can-stop-boris-johnsons-no-deal-brexit

Who you gonna call?

How Parliament can stop Boris Johnson’s no-deal Brexit

The prime minister has sidelined Parliament and set a course for
no-deal. MPs must act now to stop him

Print edition | Leaders

Aug 29th 2019

One by one, the principles on which the Brexit campaign was fought have
been exposed as hollow. Before the referendum, Leavers argued that
victory would enable them to negotiate a brilliant deal with the
European Union. Now they advocate leaving with no deal at all. Before
the vote they said that Brexit would allow Britain to strike more
free-trade agreements. Now they say that trading on the bare-bones terms
of the World Trade Organisation would be fine. Loudest of all they
talked of taking back control and restoring sovereignty to Parliament.
Yet on August 28th Boris Johnson, a leading Leaver who is now prime
minister, announced that in the run-up to Brexit Parliament would be
suspended altogether.

His utterly cynical ploy is designed to stop mps steering the country
off the reckless course he has set to leave the eu with or without a
deal on October 31st (see article). His actions are technically legal,
but they stretch the conventions of the constitution to their limits.
Because he is too weak to carry Parliament in a vote, he means to
silence it. In Britain’s representative democracy, that sets a dangerous
precedent (see article).

  But it is still not too late for mps to thwart his plans—if they get
organised. The sense of inevitability about no-deal, cultivated by the
hardliners advising Mr Johnson, is bogus. The eu is against such an
outcome; most Britons oppose it; Parliament has already voted against
the idea. Those mps determined to stop no-deal have been divided and
unfocused. When they return to work next week after their uneasy summer
recess, they will have a fleeting chance to avert this unwanted national
calamity. Mr Johnson’s actions this week have made clear why they must
seize it.

Of all her mistakes as prime minister, perhaps Theresa May’s gravest was
to plant the idea that Britain might do well to leave the eu without any
exit agreement. Her slogan that "no deal is better than a bad deal" was
supposed to persuade the Europeans to make concessions. It didn’t—but it
did persuade many British voters and mps that if the eu offered less
than perfect terms, Britain should walk away.

In fact the government’s own analysis suggests that no-deal would make
the economy 9% smaller after 15 years than if Britain had remained. Mr
Johnson says preparations for the immediate disruption are "colossal and
extensive and fantastic". Yet civil servants expect shortages of food,
medicine and petrol, and a "meltdown" at ports. A growing number of
voters seem to think that a few bumpy months and a lasting hit to
incomes might be worth it to get the whole tedious business out of the
way. This is the greatest myth of all. If Britain leaves with no deal it
will face an even more urgent need to reach terms with the eu, which
will demand the same concessions as before—and perhaps greater ones,
given that Britain’s hand will be weaker.

Mr Johnson insists that his intention is to get a new, better agreement
before October 31st, and that to do so he needs to threaten the eu with
the credible prospect of no-deal. Despite the fact that Mrs May got
nowhere with this tactic, many Tory mps still see it as a good one. The
eu wants a deal, after all. And whereas it became clear that Mrs May was
bluffing about walking out, Mr Johnson might just be serious (the
fanatics who do his thinking certainly are). Angela Merkel, Germany’s
chancellor, said recently that Britain should come up with a plan in the
next 30 days if it wants to replace the Irish backstop, the most
contentious part of the withdrawal agreement. Many moderate Tories, even
those who oppose no-deal, would like to give their new prime minister a
chance to prove his mettle.

They are mistaken. First, the effect of the no-deal threat on Brussels
continues to be overestimated in London. The eu’s position—that it is
open to plausible British suggestions—is the same as it has always been.
The eu’s priority is to keep the rules of its club intact, to avoid
other members angling for special treatment. With or without the threat
of no-deal, it will make no more than marginal changes to the existing
agreement. Second, even if the eu were to drop the backstop altogether,
the resulting deal might well be rejected by "Spartan" Tory Brexiteers,
so intoxicated by the idea of leaving without a deal that they seem
ready to vote against any agreement. And third, even if an all-new deal
were offered by the eu and then passed by Parliament, ratifying it in
Europe and passing the necessary laws in Britain would require an
extension well beyond October 31st. Mr Johnson’s vow to leave on that
date, "do or die", makes it impossible to leave with any new deal. It
also reveals that he is fundamentally unserious about negotiating one.

That is why Parliament must act now to take no-deal off the table, by
passing a law requiring the prime minister to ask the eu for an
extension. Even before Mr Johnson poleaxed Parliament, this was not
going to be easy. The House of Commons’ agenda is controlled by Downing
Street, which will allow no time for such a bill. mps showed in the
spring that they could take temporary control of the agenda, when they
passed a law forcing Mrs May to request an extension beyond the first
Brexit deadline of March 29th. This time there is no current legislation
to act as a "hook" for an amendment mandating an extension, so the
Speaker of the House would have to go against precedent by allowing mps
to attach a binding vote to an emergency debate. All that may be
possible. But with Parliament suspended for almost five weeks there will
be desperately little time.

So, if rebel mps cannot pass a law, they must be ready to use their
weapon of last resort: kicking Mr Johnson out of office with a vote of
no confidence. He has a working majority of just one. The trouble is
that attempts to find a caretaker prime minister, to request a Brexit
extension before calling an election, have foundered on whether it
should be Jeremy Corbyn, the far-left Labour leader whom most Tories
despise, or a more neutral figure.

If the various factions opposed to no-deal cannot agree, Mr Johnson will
win. But if they needed a reason to put aside their differences, he has
just given them one. The prime minister was already steering Britain
towards a no-deal Brexit that would hit the economy, wrench at the union
and cause a lasting rift with international allies. Now he has shown
himself willing to stifle parliamentary democracy to achieve his aims.
Wavering mps must ask themselves: if not now, when? ?

This article appeared in the Leaders section of the print edition under
the headline "Who’s gonna stop no-deal?"

Soros PS Will Boris Johnson’s Political Coup Succeed?  To: Peter
Mailstar <peter@mailstar.net>

(4) Soros' Project Syndicate proposes ways to beat Johnson's 'Coup'
(Anatole Kaletsky)

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/boris-johnson-suspension-of-parliament-could-work-by-anatole-kaletsky-2019-08

Will Boris Johnson’s Political Coup Succeed?

Aug 29, 2019

ANATOLE KALETSKY

The UK's prime minister is probably right to think that suspending
Parliament has made a last-minute Brexit deal more likely. Fortunately,
there is also a decent chance that his quasi-dictatorial behavior will
provoke a rapid parliamentary backlash that ends his political career.

LONDON – The long-running tragicomedy of the United Kingdom’s
relationship with the European Union is, at long last, approaching its
climax. Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s maneuver to suspend the UK
Parliament for almost the entire period leading up to the Brexit
deadline of October 31 was described by Speaker of the House John Bercow
as a "constitutional outrage," but it had one advantage. It confronted
the 650 Members of Parliament with a clear binary choice. Either a
majority of MPs will vote in the first week of September to replace
Johnson with a new caretaker prime minister, or they will leave him with
unconstrained power to implement his threat of a no-deal Brexit, putting
Britain on a collision course with the EU. That choice, in turn, will
have big implications for the EU’s future.

So, how will events unfold? When MPs return from their summer recess in
the first week of September, Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition
Labour Party, will almost certainly present a no-confidence motion to
remove Johnson from power. Because Johnson’s Conservatives and the
Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party hold a combined majority in the
House of Commons of just one vote, and given that a considerable number
of Tories oppose a no-deal Brexit, there is a high probability that
Johnson will lose.

But that would not be enough to force Johnson’s resignation. Under the
2011 Fixed-Term Parliaments Act, if a prime minister loses a
no-confidence vote, Parliament must either vote for a replacement within
14 days or the defeated government remains in place and organizes a
general election at a time of its choosing within about three months,
easily long enough for Johnson implement his promise of "Brexit, do or
die" by October 31. The only way to prevent this would be to elect a new
prime minister; with Parliament now due to be suspended, that vote would
have to take place before September 9.

Corbyn, as leader of the opposition, has already proposed himself as a
caretaker prime minister, with a strictly limited mandate to carry out
just two tasks: to extend the Brexit deadline and then immediately call
a general election. But with many pro-EU Tories vehemently opposed to
Corbyn, another candidate for caretaker prime minister could be a less
partisan figure with no personal ambitions. That could be Kenneth
Clarke, the former Tory Chancellor who, as the longest-serving MP, is
"Father of the House," or Harriet Harman, who served as interim Labour
leader in 2015.

Or perhaps the former Labour foreign minister, Margaret Beckett, might
be most likely to get Corbyn to step aside. Beckett, after all, was one
of the 36 MPs who signed the petition that allowed Corbyn to run for
Labour leader in the first place. Without her support, he would not be
where he is today. Thus, standing aside for Beckett, who is much more
likely to gain the support of anti-no-deal Tories, would be something
Corbyn could sell to his supporters. In any case, if Johnson were
deposed this way, voters would go to the polls in late October or
November and remain in the EU until then (European leaders have
repeatedly said that the Brexit deadline would be extended for a new
election).

The Conservatives would be deeply split between supporters and opponents
of Johnson’s no-deal Brexit, underscoring the Tories’ rivalry with Nigel
Farage’s militantly anti-EU Brexit Party. The opposition parties,
meanwhile, would probably enjoy some political dividends from their
temporary cooperation. The likely outcome would therefore be another
"hung parliament," with no party holding a majority. This time, however,
Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and the Scottish Nationalist Party might
well be dominant – and all would be committed to a final referendum on
whether Brexit should go ahead.

If, on the other hand, MPs fail to elect a new prime minister,
Parliament will be suspended on September 10 and there will be no
further obstacles to Johnson’s vision of Brexit, "with or without a deal."

Johnson believes that the newfound freedom from political constraints
achieved by suspending Parliament will greatly strengthen his bargaining
power in demanding changes to the failed withdrawal agreement negotiated
by his predecessor, Theresa May. Some EU leaders may well have been
hoping that Parliament would balk at the risks of a no-deal Brexit and
intervene to prevent it. With this possibility removed, the EU could
decide to offer Johnson the one modest concession he has demanded for an
orderly and cooperative Brexit deal: removal of the "Irish backstop"
provision, which would tie Britain to EU trade policies until a new
permanent trade agreement is negotiated to allow an open border between
Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

Johnson could well be right. While the UK would certainly be harmed by a
no-deal Brexit, the EU would also suffer severely. The UK is continental
Europe’s second-largest market, accounting for 12% of the eurozone’s
total exports, almost double China’s 7%, and only slightly behind the
14% share that goes to the US.

To risk a rupture with Europe’s second biggest customer would be
particularly dangerous at a time when the US and China are engaged in a
trade war, Germany is on the brink of recession as a result of
collapsing car sales, France is riven by civil disobedience, and Italy
is in open revolt against EU rules. Moreover, a no-deal Brexit would hit
Ireland – the one EU member directly affected by the backstop – harder
than any other country, and not only because of obvious disruptions in
trade and transport.1

Much more seriously, Ireland would have to take responsibility for
erecting the "hard border" in Northern Ireland that the backstop was
designed to avoid. Why would the Irish government prefer the certainty
of putting its police and army in harm’s way immediately to protect a
hard border, rather than agreeing to a compromise with Johnson that
would remove the backstop at the cost of a remote possibility that a
border would become necessary many years from now?

Once this question starts to be asked in Dublin, and also in Brussels,
Berlin, and Paris, the answer is likely to prove favorable to a new
Brexit deal. This is why Johnson is probably right to think that his
cynical calculation to suspend Parliament has made a last-minute Brexit
deal more likely. Fortunately, considering the dreadful political
implications of this "constitutionally outrageous" action in what was
once Europe’s most stable democracy, there is also a decent chance that
Johnson’s quasi-dictatorial behavior will provoke a rapid parliamentary
backlash that ends his political career.

Anatole Kaletsky is Chief Economist and Co-Chairman of Gavekal
Dragonomics. A former columnist at the Times of London, the
International New York Times and the Financial Times, he is the author
of Capitalism 4.0: The Birth of a New Economy in the Aftermath of
Crisis, which anticipated many of the post-crisis transformations of the
global economy. His 1985 book, Costs of Default, became an influential
primer for Latin American and Asian governments negotiating debt
defaults and restructurings with banks and the IMF.

(5) Told of Corporate opposition to Hard Brexit, Johnson replied: "Fuck
Business"

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44618154

Boris Johnson challenged over Brexit business 'expletive'

26 June 2018

Boris Johnson has refused to deny claims he used an expletive when asked
about business concerns about Brexit.

The foreign secretary is reported to have used the swear word at a
diplomatic gathering last week.

Asked about this in the Commons, he said he may have "expressed
scepticism about some of the views of those who profess to speak up for
business".

Theresa May said it was right the government listened to business voices
about the terms of the UK's exit.

This story contains language some may find offensive.

Airbus, BMW and Siemens have warned about the impact on their UK-based
operations if the UK leaves the EU next March without any agreement.

Their warnings have prompted different responses from ministers.

Business Secretary Greg Clark has said the UK must "take and act on the
advice of business" but Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said a warning from
Airbus that it could cease operations entirely in the UK, threatening
thousands of jobs, was "completely inappropriate".

Asked about corporate concerns over a so-called hard Brexit, at an event
for EU diplomats in London last week, Mr Johnson is reported to have
replied: "Fuck business."

Mr Johnson, who was reportedly speaking at the time to Rudolf Huygelen,
Belgium's ambassador to the EU, was also overheard saying he and others
would fight Theresa May's soft Brexit "and win". [...]

(6) Labour hard left threatens Shutdown - blockading bridges and  roads
- to stop Hard Brexit
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1171493/Brexit-latest-Labour-momentum-riot-occupy-bridges-Liverpool-Leeds-Manchester-London

Labour hard left to 'shut down Britain' by 'blockading bridges and
roads' to stop no deal

LABOUR's hard left is urging followers to "shut down the streets" the
streets in a protest against Boris Johnson's attempt to prorogue
Parliament, with campaigner Owen Jones warning: "We are not going to stop".

By CIARAN MCGATH

PUBLISHED: 14:52, Thu, Aug 29, 2019 | UPDATED: 16:12, Thu, Aug 29, 2019

Eton educated, millionaire Boris Johnson is stealing our democracy so he
can sell off our NHS to big US corporations in a No Deal, Trump first
Brexit.

"Real power doesn’t sit with the Queen or in Parliament. It’s with us
the people – and that’s why we need to take action.

"Our message to Johnson is this: if you steal our democracy, we'll shut
down the streets."

On Wednesday, Boris Johnson said he wanted to prorogue Parliament in
order to bring the current record-breaking session to a close and work
on his Government's new legislative agenda.

The decision provoked strong reactions, with opposition leaders accusing
the Prime Minister of trying to halt their efforts to block a no-deal
Brexit.

Left-wing campaigner Owen Jones has asked supporters to "take to the
streets" and "defend democracy".

He said: "Within four hours thousands of people have taken to the
streets, they have shut down Westminster, to stop the coup, to stop the
onslaught against our hard won democracy, the rights and freedoms our
ancestors fought for with such courage and determination.

"And that sense of optimism, of determination and resilience, is in the air.

"The government which only represents the elites has picked a fight.

"Our unelected Prime Minister is waging war on democracy but they
overplayed their hand.

"There is a real sense here, not just anger, but determination: we are
not going to stop."

Clvie Lewis, Labour MP for Norwich South, yesterday tweeted: "If Boris
shuts down Parliament to carry out his No-Deal Brexit, I and other MPs
will defend democracy. [...]

"We will call an extraordinary session of Parliament."

The Another Europe Is Possible organisation publicised details of a
series of rallies on Saturday being organised throughout the UK, from
Aberdeen to York.

National organiser Michael Chessum said: "The crowds are angry,
energetic and hopeful, and are taking matters into their own hands. [...]

Express.co.uk has contacted Momemtum for more details about their plans.

(7) Global Justice & Red Pepper nationwide protests 'to defend democracy
and #StopTheCoup'

https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news/2019/aug/28/no-shock-doctrine-britain-dont-let-boris-johnson-shut-down-parliament

https://www.redpepper.org.uk/no-shock-doctrine-for-britain-stop-boris-johnson/

No shock doctrine for Britain: Stop Boris Johnson

Director of Global Justice Now, Nick Dearden, calls for swift action to
stop Boris Johnson shutting down Parliament

August 29, 2019

{photo} protestors march with red banner saying stop tory brexit {end}

Britain’s political crisis just got much deeper when the prime minister
announced he would suspend parliament from mid-September for five weeks.
Coming the day after MPs agreed a cross-party plan to avoid No Deal,
it’s clear that Boris Johnson’s purpose is to prevent MPs from having
time to stop his dangerous vision for Brexit.

Whether you were for Leave or Remain, this is about democracy. We cannot
allow this prime minister to suspend parliament because he doesn’t think
it will vote for No Deal. Every one of us needs to stand up and be counted.

Already, over 1.4 million have signed a petition on the government
website calling for the suspension to be reversed. Thousands of people
have taken to the streets to say no to the shutdown of democracy and
further protests are scheduled across the UK.

The Shock Doctrine comes to Britain At Global Justice Now, we always
feared that Brexit would be used to push through a radical programme of
deregulation and liberalisation, which is why we campaigned to remain in
the EU during the referendum. It’s why we set out our red lines for any
acceptable Brexit deal in the aftermath of the result. And it’s why we
opposed Theresa May’s deal earlier this year.

Since Boris Johnson became prime minister, we have got a clearer idea of
what this extreme Brexit would look like: a toxic trade deal with the
US, a hostile environment extended to millions more migrants, and free
market policies extended into more and more aspects of our society. Now
he is attempting to bypass our elected parliament to force this through.

It’s what the author and activist Naomi Klein has called ‘the shock
doctrine’, creating a political crisis in order to restructure an
economy in deeply unpopular ways. Johnson knows that he can’t get this
vision through parliament, so he’s proposing to render our elected
representatives powerless to stop it.

A dangerous moment

This attack on democratic rights is part of a global trend which is
being used by authoritarian leaders in the United States, India, Brazil,
the Philippines and more. Donald Trump and his fellow populist leaders
are attempting to subvert democracy so they can push through policies
which will make the world a less fair, equal or sustainable place.

We would never claim that our democracy is perfect. We urgently need to
reform our political system, as well as radically change our economy and
our relationship with our environment. But Johnson’s attack on our
democratic rights will only make it harder.

This is a very serious moment for this country, and a very dangerous
moment for the world. Please help challenge this attack on our
democratic rights, and using those rights to work for a better world.
Sign the petition against the suspension of parliament. Join the
nationwide protests this Saturday 31 August to defend democracy and
#StopTheCoup.

(8) Socialist Worker Trots call for Mass Strikes to kick Johnson out

https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/48862/As+Johnson+suspends+parliament%2C+protest+to+kick+him+out

As Johnson suspends parliament, protest to kick him out

by Charlie Kimber

In a sign of his weakness, Boris Johnson has asked the queen for
permission to suspend parliament for five weeks from early September.
Johnson wants to reduce the chances of being defeated by MPs over his
plans for a no-deal Brexit.

Having been elected only by Tory members, he now wants to escape further
scrutiny. Protests have been called all over Britain.

The crisis has to be used to break Tory rule.

It is crucial that these protests are anti-Tory and for forcing Johnson
and the government out—not protests against Brexit.

And they must be open to people who voted Leave.

It will be disastrous if Johnson and Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage
are allowed to pose as the friends of the people against out of touch
MPs who are ignoring people’s votes.

That is why it was a mistake for Labour to line up with the Lib Dems and
others earlier this week against a no-deal Brexit.

The Tories’ version of Brexit is wrong because it is racist and
pro-austerity, not because it is "bad for Britain". [...]

There had already been plans to hold a recess during the party
conference season from 12 September until 7 October. So in reality the
shutdown will lead to MPs losing four to six sitting days, depending on
when the suspension begins.

Parliament re-assembles on Tuesday, and there are certain to be attempts
to stop the shutdown, and to block a no-deal Brexit. [...]

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said Labour will do everything it can to
prevent what he described as a "smash and grab" by the government. [...]

He also demanded a meeting with the queen.

Corbyn said the first thing Labour would do was to put forward
legislation to prevent the suspension, and that there would be a
challenge in the form of a vote of no confidence.

Some union leaders spoke about a coup by Johnson, but put forward very
few plans for action.

Mick Whelan, the general secretary of the train drivers’ trade union,
Aslef, said Johnson’s decision to "try to sideline parliament in the
run-up to Brexit" could cause civil unrest.

"Whatever your views on Brexit, the democratic process must underpin
what is done in all our names—or civil unrest will be the result."

GMB general secretary Tim Roache said, "For a prime minister who wanted
our parliament to ‘take back control’ this is as ridiculous as it is
worrying for the very foundations of our democracy.

"If Johnson is so sure he is in line with the ‘will of the people’
there’s a very easy way to find out—call an election."

Union leaders should have been calling mass strikes and protests from
the beginning of the political crisis over Brexit seven months ago when
Theresa May was defeated in parliament. They need to start calling for
this action now.