For those that don't follow the machinations of British politics - and I would understand if you chose not to - a leadership election is about to get underway. Between general elections and ill-conceived referendums, leadership elections are about the only other thing that breaks up the monotony of parliamentary democracy. As the party holding the election is currently in power the winner will become Prime Minister. Why anyone would want this job is beyond me, but that's how it is. The next Prime Minister will be (probably) the biggest influence on the direction that Brexit takes from this point forward.
One of the underdogs in the race is Rory Stewart. He's had an interesting and varied life outside of politics (Brad Pitt bought the rights to a film about him) and appears to be clever & coherent. This means that he's got no chance of winning, but his ground campaign is pretty interesting and he's doing a good job of putting some of the Brexit nonsense to rights. Rory is against a no-deal Brexit (yay), but he also thinks that a second referendum would be a mistake (boo). A couple of months ago I would have strongly argued that he is wrong, but acceptance sets in as time goes on and I'm developing some sympathy for this view. His reasoning is straightforward and nothing to do with sovereignty or democracy or any of the other tropes that Brexiteers wheel out, simply that there's no point in an exercise where the result will only tell us what we already know: the country (or at least those that vote in these things) is still split. A referendum only solves the practical issue of whether we stay or leave - it does nothing for the social or political fallout, which will far outlast it.
The latin term auribus teneo lupum translates to 'hold a wolf by the ears' and is used to describe situations where doing nothing and doing something are equally risky. A more modern interpretation would be 'dammed if you do and dammed if you don't'. It feels fitting for our current predicament.