People who say there's no difference between Labour and the Tories on Brexit are lying through their teeth

People keep misleadingly claiming that there's absolutely no difference between Labour and the Tories on Brexit, and even that there's nothing to indicate that a Labour Brexit would be any less harmful than a Tory one!

In reality there's an absolute mountain of evidence from the last 30 months of chaos that it couldn't possibly be anything like as bad as the Tories running Brexit exclusively for their own selfish party political interests.

I'm certainly not advocating a Labour Brexit in this article, in fact I feel they should move position at some point in the near future towards offering a "cancel Brexit" vs "back to square one and try again" referendum. However I'm so utterly sick of the despicable campaign of lies from disingenuous Remainer fanatics that I need to point out just how dishonest they're being when they pretend there's no difference between Labour and the Tories on Brexit. 

• Labour have repeatedly assured the public that they would never deliberately trigger a disastrous "no deal" meltdown like Theresa May keeps threatening, because they say it's "the worst possible deal for Britain". So at least this devastating nightmare scenario would be completely off the table under a Labour/progressive coalition government.

• The fact that even if Jeremy Corbyn wanted a "no deal" meltdown (which he repeatedly says he doesn't because it would be a "national disaster"), the vast majority of Labour MPs would never vote to allow it to happen anyway.

• The clear economic evidence that Labour's policy of Customs Union + Single Market would be the least damaging form of Brexit, and far less economically damaging than either a Tory "no deal" meltdown or Theresa May's shitty deal on the table.

• The fact that under a Labour/progressive coalition government the highly competent Keir Starmer would be in charge of the Brexit negotiations instead of a succession of absolute Tory numbskulls like David Davis and Dominic Raab. Even if you don't like Brexit surely it makes sense to have someone competent and intelligent in charge of Britain's side of the negotiations instead of a parade of utterly dense Tories?

• The fact that if Labour or a progressive coalition were put in the position of trying to negotiate Brexit (if a repeat EU referendum was lost by the Remainers for example), at least they'd do it with a good faith cooperative approach rather than repeating Theresa May's bad faith threats and tantrums, or idiotic Tory ministers mouthing off to the British press about how they plan to renege on the agreements they've just signed up to (as if they imagine that Europeans can't read English or browse the Internet)!

• Far from "enabling Tory Brexit" as many Remain extremists allege, Labour has repeatedly voted against the Tory government in practically every single Brexit related vote in parliament. Consider Labour's Amendment 58 to the EU Withdrawal Bill as just one of many examples of firm Labour opposition to shifty hard-right Tory Brexit scheming.

• The fact that Labour (and other opposition parties) voted against Theresa May's EU Withdrawal legislation because it did not protect workers' rights, environmental laws, food standards, consumer protections, and freedom from discrimination. A Labour/progressive coalition government would work to enshrine these rights and protections into UK law.

• The fact that whether you like him or hate him, Corbyn is an absolute stickler for doing things by the proper rules, meaning no efforts to ignore the rule of law and sideline parliament (as we've seen from the Tories over and again for the last 30 months).

• The fact that Labour (and other opposition parties) legally forced Theresa May to have the meaningful vote (you know, the one that she shamelessly postponed at the last minute because she knew she was going to lose it) without which she was planning to just rule by diktat. Labour and opposition parties actively want the executive to be accountable to parliament.

• The fact that Labour (and other opposition parties) succeeded in getting Theresa May's government declared in contempt of parliament for trying to hide Brexit documents (also consider their determination to stop the Tories hiding the Brexit impact assessments too). At least a Labour/progressive coalition would approach Brexit in an open and accountable manner.

• The fact that under Corbyn Labour policy is being handed back to the membership. If the Labour membership vote for a second referendum, or vote for assurances that Labour would remain in the Single Market, that's what Labour would do.

• The fact that the majority of Labour members are strongly opposed to a "no deal" Brexit, while a hefty (and rapidly increasing) proportion of Tory members are of the Brextremist blue-kip headbanger persuasion.

• The fact that Labour have been very careful not to rule out the option of another Brexit referendum. They're not promising one yet, but they're also not ruling one out either if the Tory Brexit shambles continues to get worse (which seems inevitable). Given that Theresa May's deal is dead in the water and a "no deal" meltdown is unthinkable, a referendum with the options of "cancel Brexit" or "back to square one" would seem like the most sensible approach from a strategic perspective.

• Labour's repeatedly stated but widely ignored six tests.

• And perhaps most importantly of all, the fact that a Labour/progressive coalition government would cancel Tory austerity and abandon their deliberately malicious economic strategy of loading the majority of the cost of economic crises onto the poorest and most vulnerable people in society. At least if there was a Brexit related economic downturn under a Labour/progressive coalition government they wouldn't maliciously load the burden onto poor people, sick and disabled people, jobless people, low-income workers, and children like the Tories doubtlessly would (bearing in mind the Brexit economic crisis would be much bigger under either of the Tory Brexit scenarios too).

Of course it's entirely fair to argue that "no Brexit" is still a better option than a Labour Brexit (an argument I'd actually agree with at this point), but anyone trying to argue that there's no evidence that a Tory Brexit would be worse than a Labour one is brazenly lying through their teeth for ideological purposes (making them no better than the Tory Brextremists who created this atrocious mess in the first place with their deliberate campaign of politically motivated lies).

It doesn't matter whether these people are lying through pure ignorance, through tribalist loyalty to the Lib-Dems, or just because they saw the Brextremists win the 2016 referendum with their outrageous campaign of lies so they're adopting the same tactics for themselves.

Outright lying degrades the political discourse and drives political apathy. And it's utterly unacceptable no matter who is doing it, or for what purpose.

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.

OR