It is a threat to democracy because, after 3 years, we now know that it is a power wrestling within the ruling class, for the exclusive benefit of the ruling class. All the good reasons you may have had before and right after the referendum are irrelevant now. What Brexit is and what it is used to do is clear for all to see, and it is not a democratic excercise.
To take a less loaded example: that's like sending money to a charity "Food for Africa Children" and realising 3 years after, your money is instead funnelled into buying a super yatcht for some billionaire somewhere.
Feeding Africa Children is good, giving money to charity is good but you can no longer make the argument that "Food for Africa Children" is good, and you can no longer claim any moral high ground if you continue to support that organisation.
No significant proportion of people have changed their mind. The leavers still want to leave, everyone's sick of parliament dragging this out for years.
Many remainer's are still hoping for some sort of magic unicorn waving it's horn and we'll stay in.
The time to do that was 2 years ago, not now, just get it over with already.
The problem is the post-truth targetted propaganda campaign has been de-facto legalised.
The current government behaviour, especially in a country without written constitution is similarly going to set a very bad precedent. A lot of the process works because the opposition and government are expected to behave in gentleman-ish fashion, but this government is resetting the rule to "anything is ok to stay in power".
The government is abusing its 50% of the population into distrusting Parliament and the Judiciary at every opportunity. They do the same with the civil service.
You can't expect Labour or other to "stay civil" when there is a party winning with those strategies. Maybe not at the next GE but surely the one after that, all that you see today is going to be the new normal. And that will affect the UK only major asset, its softpower. One that is gone, the future government will have to double down on the propaganda to distract the masses. If your voting power is limited to vote for "mystery candidate" with manifesto in no way grounded in reality, you have a democracy in name only.
Id agree that each side is entrenched, I still think you need to have that vote, or come up with an option somewhere between the 2 camps, not swing to an even further extreme as we seem to be doing at the moment. No deal wasn't a thing we were discussing in the run up to the referendum, it wasn't even a thing we were really discussing this time last year.
You can't really expect to be taken seriously with nonsense like this?
In requiring a super-majority, and a search for a second government first it's badly broken the system. As we can see, there is a government 20 odd votes short of a majority stuck there. Stuck there having lost every vote they've called. Stuck there because they are trying to evade the extension parliament voted for, that would take EU membership beyond an election.
I am intrigued though, that neither side has made calls to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act, despite it very clearly not being fit for purpose.
Boris Johnson doesn't want an election. It was suggested after the first vote that he could table something that only required a simple majority, but he didn't, you cant really argue it's people against parliament, when you are (hopefully) a majority of parliament.
Those against a hard Brexit don't want an election now because it impairs their ability to do that, plus its been nicely illustrated to them why you don't want too much power to reside with the executive.
And even then, it only exists because Johnson is overtly trying to use the disruption of an election as a mechanism to enable no-deal, which is why Parliament refuses to let him have one.
So yes, it seems shocking, but the last Conservative leader to win an election and then serve a full term of majority government was Thatcher from '83 to '87
Both democracies and markets assume informed participants for their proper functioning. If the participants are not informed or misinformed then both democracies and markets can be gamed by those “in the know” at the expense of the misinformed.
He had a brother and father in politics, Johnson is a very common surname, Boris unambiguously identifies him, and he's not head of state.
This isn't true either. Nigel Farage likely wins that unenviable title.
> ... and it is therefore appropriate that he is tasked with making Brexit happen ...
That doesn't necessarily follow. His reasons for supporting / promoting Brexit have been shown to be based on falsehoods.
> ... and taking responsibility for its success or failure.
I appreciate your optimism that there remains any doubt about which of those it will be.
It's clear that this guy - Boris, Johnson, or Boris Johnson if you prefer - has not and will not take responsibility for his actions.
Claims of 'Brexit == democracy at its best' are massively misguided - they presuppose that the voters were not outright lied to (they were).
I don't understand what you're saying about John Major.
Here's the 1992 election: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_Kingdom_general_el...
336 seats, out of 651, with 326 needed for a majority.
Current conservatives have 288 seats out of 650.
No Conservative government has served an entire term with an outright majority since Thatcher in the 1980s. Johnson is in a sense "unelected", but his premiership is no less legitimate than that of Cameron or Major.
Like it or not, Johnson was the "biggest" voice behind the successful Brexit campaign, and it is therefore appropriate that he is tasked with making Brexit happen, and taking responsibility for its success or failure.
Its completely fair to say that Brexit is an economically stupid and possibly xenophobic project, but its not fair to say that Brexit is a threat to democracy. Brexit is exactly what democracy looks like at its best: the people forcing the ruling classes to make decisions that are against the ruling class's own interests.
EDIT: Johnson is of course the head of government, not the head of state, since the UK is a monarchy.