> A more assertive Britain would be a strategic move, to exchange short-term disruption for long-term gain. What long term gain, exactly? I still fail to see h

> A more assertive Britain would be a strategic move, to exchange short-term disruption for long-term gain. What long term gain, exactly? I still fail to see how this isn't a slower and more painful way to arrive at (most likely) the same deal they'd get in the first place. What new long-term concession do you envision them getting from a bit of chest thumping? > An implicit mandate of Brexit is to demonstrate that the UK can not only survive, but thrive on its own Except it can't? I scarcely think any country actually can in the modern age, without making significant and dramatic sacrifices that even the most ardent Brexit supporter is most likely not ready to accept. Brexit in and of itself was obviously over-optimistic. Doubling down on those delusions doesn't seem like a recipe for anything but unnecessary hardship - mostly for the Brits themselves.