I haven’t been following British politics.
But after reading mainstream articles about the British election I feel just as entitled to bloviate.
Even the Economist is blithering that May’s campaign for a hard Brexit has been rejected but there are no grounds to reverse the referendum result.
My recollection is that May opposed Brexit and was given the job of recovering from Cameron’s blunder. She was forced to abandon the pretence that Britain could become the only member of the single market that did not comply with free movement of labor. There never was an option for “soft Brexit” nor any preparations for a “hard Brexit”.
So I assume there will now have to be a second referendum to cancel Brexit. The only reason I think this might be worth mentioning is that none of the articles I have read agree.
C21st Left 
Although I do assume there will now have to be a second referendum to cancel Brexit, the other possibility is a Norwegian type outcome.
My real point is that it is now more than 90% certain Britain will remain in the single market, with free movement of labor but none of the articles I had seen noticed this.
Since then I saw one article mentioning that Europeans, as opposed to anglosphere analysts are talking about “Breturn” and “Bremain”. Googling those terms would no doubt result in some less absurd articles.
But the first one I found merely pointed out that this possibility exists and has been strangely ignored in market responses.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/after-brexit-get-ready-for-a-breturn-as-britain-reverses-course-2016-06-28
LikeLike
Pingback: Brexit – from blustering and blithering to outright gibbering | C21st Left