1/ Quick thread. At the end of the third week of Brexit being "done", I can only say that I'm exhausted.

Immediate pressures on companies who have been trading goods have been on grappling with all of the new customs and regulatory requirements.

1/ Brexit politics is built on fear. Frightened people tend to seek security in the tribe. Once that tribe might have been the Labour movement, but now in a fragmented post-industrial society it is the nation. Tribal identification is emotional, not rational.

2/ A tribe that feels under threat wants to control its borders, and who enters into its territory. It demands loyalty and solidarity, and its prime virtue is self-sacrifice - economic arguments won't persuade tribalists. Its members want to feel it is strong and powerful.

3/ Tribalism at a time of crisis is intolerant of dissent. The tribe must pull together against its enemies. Dissent and questioning cause division and disrupt the collective effort. Criticism is seen as treason. The Brexit right have ruthlessly exploited tribal psychology.

4/ To understand Brexit politics it is necessary to understand that the working and middle classes are dead as coherent political forces and that frightened and insecure people are now clinging to the only available powerful tribe, the nation-tribe.

5/ The Brexit right understands and ruthlessly exploits basic social emotions. In contrast the centre and centre-left mostly can see no further than the blinkered logic of rational individualism, from which perspective everything else is irrational and incomprehensible.

Brexit. A Eurovision Negotiating Contest. How are the contestants doing? To read the UK press you’d be forgiven for being ... completely misinformed. We’re lurching into a crisis on a scale not seen since at least 1956 & probably 1945. Here’s what’s really going on. A thread./1.

For a number of key journalists, their only job is to take dictation from the 10 Downing Street spokesman & give it to the Times, Telegraph or Spectator for publishing. This is part of a therapy effort for the small minority of the population who read those publications & .../2.

... would otherwise be confused by being confronted with the reality of the world around them. The articles are interesting for two reasons:

⁃They tell you precisely what 10 Downing Street currently wants those readers, which include other journalists, to hear. /3.

⁃Looking at their detailed content, such as it is, shows just how possible a “deal” quite obviously is & how nonsensical a “no deal” would be. They also (if you’re familiar with a bit of background, which you surely are) highlight just how bad a “deal” of the sort .../4.

... the government envisages - a massive climb down from the UK’s extraordinarily privileged position in the EU’s customs union & single market - would be for the UK. And how a “no deal” would be even worse - substantially so - than such a (really awful) “deal”. /5.

1/ Lots of good analysis out there on why the EU-China CAI is a bad decision in the context of Xinjiang, transatlantic partnerships, etc. But I also think that even the trade/econ benefits of the CAI look quite limited. Thread:

2/ It highlights, as a win, that China’s preservation of existing liberalizations. That’s positive, but not really a big problem; the bigger issue is stagnation, where reform pledges have failed to materialize after years/decades of promises. Great example is in the FDI openings,

3/ which are highlighted to include cloud, auto, fin services etc—all areas of EU/MNC interest. Thing is, these openings aren’t new. China has begun opening auto/finance since 2018/19, while the 50% cap on cloud services has remained unchanged since 2015 (or before if we consider

4/ WTO ascension commitments vs the 2015 Telecom Catalogue, but that’s for another day). So these are existing openings that are repackaged as “wins.” More critical issue beyond FDI caps is around licensing issuance, which still big problem. Arguably some more significance in

5/ R&D and health? Not an expert, but the FDI conditions (eg hospitals only in certain cities) are limiting, while R&D could be complicated by data/info controls. It’s also unclear how existing tech transfer prohibitions exceed existing protections in the foreign investment law,