Going to have to disagree with my learned friend here. If anyone moved on level playing field it was the UK, on the principle of a ratchet, or tariffs for divergence which was still being denied midweek. Changing the way in this might be achieved (many options) is insignificant.

Just bringing together my various bits and pieces on the UK-EU. The first reactions - a significant agreement...

Winners and losers of the UK-EU deal.

Why this was always going to be a problem - regulatory soverignty v free trade involves trade offs...

Going back to mid-2019, why the deal the UK wanted from the EU, the same benefits with none of the costs, couldn't be available.

More recently, why the Brexit dream is dying - because it wasn't designed to deal with a situation where we had to choose between trade with the EU and freedom.

As promised, a little story. Of how the EU ask of the UK on the level playing field is indeed new, how that came about, and why we should have been able to deal with this a lot better. And how, indirectly, David Frost is one of the reasons. Beware, contains analysis... 1/

Let us go back 5 years to the height of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) discussions. As you may recall, by 2015 TTIP was about as popular in the EU as allegedly the EU is these days in the red wall. What, thought the EU and Member States, could be done? 2/

TTIP will be more popular, declared more than one insider, if we show there are tough labour and environment protections against undercutting by the nefarious and probably untrustworthy US. That, optimistically they said, will get NGOs on side. 3/

But there was a problem with EU level playing field provisions in 2015. The unit of DG Trade responsible absolutely did not believe anything should be enforceable. Pages of loose commitments, fine. Add more! But apparently enforcement was best done through a good chat. 4/

Now such soft-touch EU enforcement of level playing fields was probably designed particularly for developing countries, where sanctions were seen as unfairly penalising struggling business and individuals for the actions of a terrible government. Not the US. 5/

After the 9/11 attacks, airlines and public buildings adopted a flurry of "security" measures, like taking away pen-knives from fliers or requiring visitors to office buildings to be photographed or present a driver's license.

1/

Bruce Schneier's seminal 2003 "Beyond Fear" called these measures: #securitytheater.

Schneier pointed out that these measures would be easy to circumvent, and were thus providing only the comforting appearance of security - not security

Security theater is worse than nothing. Security theater gives people the false impression that their risks have been mitigated, when actually things are just as dangerous.

After al, if you know that danger exists, you can take some steps to mitigate or avoid it.

3/

But if you have the false impression that you've been made safer, you might unwittingly engage in risky behavior.

4/

Like, if you know your car's brakes are flaky, you might nurse the car along to the mechanic at low speed on side-streets.

But if you don't know about the brakes, you're apt to discover their flaws at 75mph on the freeway.

5/

Horseshoe theory sets off my bs detector & the divisions on the left leave me at a loss for an explanation- Venn diagram? Another shape? What's going on?
Enter @bastardspod! They really break this down & sort it out in a way that helped me out a lot.

Three of their points I found particularly useful in explaining why the horseshoe looks correct to some or why/how some ppl that look left-ish are really extreme right or take that turn (ally with boogaloo or proud boys, for instance?). 2/10

📍as you go farther left, some are more attracted to authoritarianism or violence like those on the right. BUT this is NOT a horseshoe bc the ideals of left & right are starkly different. That's important - this isn't a horseshoe. 3/10

Their examples are Kessler (of Unite the Right) who started in Occupy Wall St NY & Mussolini who started out against imperialism. Seemingly left-ish ppl turned fascist - why? I agree with the hosts when they said if you're anti-authoritarian, you won't end up a fascist. 4/10

📍(surprise!) toxic masculinity (they don't use those words) or wounded masculine pride is a factor. The pod says~getting the shit kicked out of you can push men in a violent authoritarian direction. Feeling disenfranchised like MRAs and white nationalists seems related too. 5/10