Starmer’s EU reset triggers outbreak of Brexit derangement syndrome | John Crace

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Keir Starmer's EU Negotiations Spark Controversy Among Brexit Supporters"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 4.5
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

The recent negotiations led by Keir Starmer regarding the UK's relationship with the European Union have sparked intense reactions reminiscent of the tumultuous Brexit years. During these negotiations, it became evident that the EU was unlikely to make concessions on agricultural standards without corresponding compromises on fishing rights. As the deal approached completion, various Brexit proponents, including figures like Lord Hannan and Lord Frost, expressed outrage, framing the outcomes as a significant capitulation. Their narratives painted a picture of the UK succumbing to European demands, with Hannan's provocative comments likening the UK to a submissive figure. This highlights a disconnect among prominent Brexiteers, who seem to ignore the fundamental principles of negotiation that require both give and take. The atmosphere surrounding these discussions was charged, with former Prime Minister Boris Johnson also entering the fray, seemingly overwhelmed by the implications of the negotiations and resorting to absurd metaphors to express his discontent.

As the deal was finally presented at a press conference, leaders including António Costa of Portugal and Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission emphasized the positive aspects of the agreement, framing it as a new chapter in UK-EU relations. Starmer, buoyed by recent trade successes with other nations, portrayed the deal as a practical step forward that avoids a return to the single market or customs union, while still acknowledging the complexities of fishing rights and EU regulations. However, the British media's focus remained on questioning whether Starmer had indeed surrendered to the EU, illustrating a lingering 'Brexit derangement syndrome' among commentators. Despite the challenges and criticisms, Starmer aims to improve the economic situation of the country, navigating the post-Brexit landscape with an intent to foster growth and job creation. The ongoing discourse reflects a broader struggle within the UK to reconcile the realities of Brexit with public sentiment, as many voters express regret over the decision and a desire to revert to pre-Brexit conditions without acknowledging the consequences of their choice.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article by John Crace reflects on the ongoing negotiations between the UK and the EU, particularly focusing on the recent reset proposed by Keir Starmer. It explores the reactions from various political figures, especially those aligned with Brexit, and highlights the intense emotions and polarized opinions surrounding the topic.

Political Context and Emotional Reactions

The piece evokes a sense of nostalgia for the tumultuous Brexit years, portraying a community still grappling with post-Brexit identity and negotiations. Crace uses vivid language to express how negotiations with the EU often descend into chaos, reflecting the complexities inherent in such discussions. The references to well-known Brexit figures, such as Lord Hannan and Lord Frost, indicate a broader critique of their roles in shaping public opinion and policy, suggesting that their narratives may be out of touch with the current reality.

Narrative Construction

The article aims to construct a narrative that positions Starmer's EU reset as a necessary yet contentious move, one that is met with fierce opposition from hardline Brexit supporters. The language employed often ridicules these figures, framing them as outlandish and disconnected from the practical implications of their positions. This choice of wording serves to reinforce a perception of rationality on one side of the debate while painting the opposition as irrational or extreme.

Potential Distractors

While the article focuses on Brexit negotiations, it may also serve to distract from other pressing political or economic issues facing the UK. By concentrating on the theatrical elements of Brexit discussions, it can divert public attention from broader economic challenges or social unrest that may not align with the pro-Brexit narrative.

Manipulative Aspects

The use of hyperbolic language and personal attacks on Brexit proponents suggests a manipulative element in the article. This approach can polarize readers further, entrenching them in one of the two camps surrounding Brexit debates. The aim seems to be to galvanize support for a particular viewpoint while discrediting opposing perspectives.

Credibility and Reliability

The article's reliance on emotive language and personal anecdotes may affect its overall credibility. Although it addresses real concerns regarding Brexit negotiations, the way it frames the discussion leans towards sensationalism rather than balanced reporting. This may lead readers to question the objectivity of the analysis.

Community Support and Target Audience

The tone and content of the piece are likely to resonate with audiences who share a critical view of Brexit and its proponents. It appeals to those who favor a more collaborative approach to EU relations and who may feel alienated by the hardline rhetoric of Brexit supporters.

Market and Economic Implications

In terms of market impact, discussions surrounding Brexit negotiations can influence investor confidence and market stability. Sentiment towards UK stocks, particularly those in industries directly affected by EU relations, may fluctuate based on public perception of the negotiations. Companies involved in agriculture and fishing may be particularly sensitive to the outcomes of these discussions.

Global Context

The article does not directly address the broader implications of Brexit on global power dynamics but does touch on the tensions between the UK and its European neighbors. The ongoing negotiations have significant ramifications for international relations, especially in trade. The themes discussed are relevant to current global economic discussions, given the interconnected nature of markets today.

Use of AI in Writing

There is no clear indication that AI was employed in the writing of this article. However, the style and structure could suggest a formulaic approach, which may be characteristic of certain AI-generated content. If AI were used, it might have shaped the tone to align with typical journalistic styles, emphasizing dramatic language to engage readers.

The article is a critical commentary on the state of Brexit negotiations and serves to galvanize a specific audience while potentially obscuring broader issues. Its reliability is compromised by its emotive language and personal attacks, making it a piece that reflects more of an opinion than a balanced news report.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Euphoric recall. Or more likely PTSD. It was like we were in a time warp. Back in the madness of theBrexityears. When otherwise sensible people lost all sense of reason. And when the mad became madder still. The days of betrayal and surrender. When our closest allies for the previous 70 years became our deadliest enemy. Time to stare them down. Britons never, never, never shall be slaves. We take no shit from anyone.

Keir Starmer’s EU reset went to the wire. Of course it did. Every negotiation with Brussels always does. It’s in the terms and conditions. There was no way the EU was going to give away something on agricultural standards without getting something on fishing in return. You don’t want to encourage other countries to believe they will get a better deal by leaving the EU. Even by the time of the final communique there were still plenty of loose ends. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. Remember that? Argh!

Still that didn’t stop some of the Brexit lunatics from voicing their opinions long before even an outline of a deal was announced. They already had their narrative. This was a surrender on an unforgivable scale. Daniel – unbelievably now Lord – Hannan was writing on X that Britain had become Europe’s very own gimp. Squeezed into a black leather jump suit with a ball in our mouth. Sometimes you wish Danny would keep his fantasies to himself.

Then there was David – unbelievably now Lord – Frost. What is it about Brexit that led to so many people who had objectively made British citizens less well off getting promoted to the upper chamber?

Frosty the No Man was desperately trying to rewrite history. Again. He has been doing that for more than five years now. Our very own Lady Macbeth trying to wash away the blood. Boris Johnson’s Brexit negotiator whose whole life is now devoted to trying to uncover the person who negotiated such a bad deal. He was trying to persuade himself that he had always known his fishing deal was rubbish but that the EU would cut him some slack now because they felt sorry for him. The man needs help.

It’s as if every Brexiter has had a memory wipe. Has no recollection of how deals are made. That the essence of any negotiation is give and take. That there need to be rules which both sides are obliged to follow. But this was also too much for Boris. He went mad on gimp masks too. God knows what you might find in his internet search history. Let’s hope Carrie hasn’t been keeping tabs on him. Here was how the world worked. Britain was at the top, telling every other country what to do. Anything else would be a total betrayal of our sovereignty.

Come late Monday morning, a deal of sorts had been negotiated and António Costa, the president of the European Council; Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, and Keir Starmer were ready to face the media at the Lancaster House press conference. Costa went first. Trying to put everyone to sleep. He has the air of someone who has grown used to the fact that he seldom says anything interesting. It’s how he got the job. Everything was marvellous, he mumbled. This was a new chapter.

Von der Leyen was slightly more animated. She was pleased the EU and the UK had reached solutions. We were entering a new era of post-Brexit relations. A security and defence partnership. A deal on energy, fish and food. The youth experience scheme. Downgraded from a youth mobility scheme. A sop to the Brits. On no account should anyone think the UK had backtracked on free movement. Better to think of overseas students living entirely in virtual reality.

Then came Keir. Flushed with success after his trade deals with India and the US. This was a triumph. No return to the single market or the customs union. But the next best thing. A reminder that British fishers sell more than 70% of their catch to the EU as we don’t like the ones they are selling. It was time to look forward to the future. To move on from the same stale old fights.

Though it was the past the British media wanted to interrogate. Hadn’t we surrendered to the EU? We had sold out our fishers. We had become a nation of rule-takers. Brexit derangement syndrome had gripped the broadcasters. Keir gently reminded everyone he was creating jobs, facilitating trade and growth.

Even after nine years, it was still too soon to say the obvious. That Britain had voted to make itself poorer. That Brexiters had radicalised themselves. No one had been insisting we leave the single market and the customs union during the referendum campaign. That had only become a truth some time later. So all Starmer was trying to do was to make the country just a little bit better off. You’d have thought from the reaction that this was a major schism.

Sign up toFirst Edition

Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

after newsletter promotion

GB News could barely contain itself. The Tories were threatening to undo all this, the reporter quavered. Er … How exactly? They aren’t about to win an election any time soon. If ever. As if to prove how unserious the Conservatives have become, Kemi Badenoch chose to call a press conference in a broom cupboard in the afternoon. Just to embarrass herself. The broadcasters could barely be bothered to cover it as the sound continued to cut out. We could have been underwater. Not waving but drowning.

Priti Patel went first. Luckily for her she was totally inaudible. She will appreciate this in later years. Then came Kemi, declaring that Starmer had broken her five golden rules. Rules that even her own MPs don’t know or care about. Rules that even the Victorians would have thought nuts. Most Brexit voters now think Brexit was a bad idea. They just want things to return to how they were without anyone reminding them that they had voted for it.

We ended with Victoria Atkins and the fish. Vicky had a pet hake who was determined to gasp out his manifesto. “I, Harry the Hake, do solemnly declare that I will live and die British. I would rather be left to rot on the jetty than be fed to some Frenchie or Kraut. God save the queen. Sorry, king.” It had been that kind of a day.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian