UK Politics: A Farcical Aquatic Ceremony

[scotcat]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

But if Scotland leaves the U.K., wouldn't it's citizens cease to be British? 

Basically? Yes. We're not at the point yet where we're leaving the UK, though it very well could come. 

I honestly don't know how we can stay in the UK after this - we voted clearly to remain within the EU, which puts us directly at odds with Westminster.  If we get dragged out of the EU against our will, it likely will cause big problems.  What people tend to forget is that we are not merely a 'region' of the UK - we are a country.  

[ljkeane]

1 hour ago, The BlackBear said:

Nope, Britain is to do with Geography. Northern Irish folks are UK but not British. So they aren't synonymous.

That probably depends on which Northern Irish person you ask, they have some issues with that. Also geographically speaking the island of Ireland is part of the British Isles, it's just, politically speaking, not a particularly popular name amongst some Irish people so they prefer to use the name North Atlantic Archipelago or something like that.

[Slick Mongoose]

No Johnson or Gove at PMQ's today.

Pathetic.

[Free Northman Reborn]

2 hours ago, Andrés Garcia said:

You make some good points. I'm fervently against the EU, but for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with immigration. In fact, I'm an open border kind of guy. I just think that democracies should be very local and small. People should vote on things that directly affect them. They should be able to feel the influence of their vote to a larger degree. Their representatives, in so far as they need any, should not be too removed geographically, socially, and economically speaking. I want our strategy for getting rid of nation states to be directed downwards rather than upwards. I therefore believe that any development towards big supranational states, modern empires in effect, is dangerous and not in line with the ideals I associate with democracy. These are very strong values that I have that I can't put to the side just to spite some bigoted assholes.

Absolutely agree. That is my position as well. This also makes it more possible for like minded people to cluster together in communities that largely represent their way of life, values and norms. The more localized you can make your government the less chance of being ruled over by the masses of people who live far away under very different conditions and according to very different lifestyles to yourself.

And it also makes it easier to choose where you want to live and who you want to associate with. Self determination at the most basic level.

[Which Tyler]

29 minutes ago, England's Finest said:

No Johnson or Gove at PMQ's today.

Pathetic.

Probably at Wimbledon - far more important [/sarcasm]

[A Horse Named Stranger]

18 hours ago, DjourouLoveMe? said:

Both are politicians, in other words?


About Boris' comments on always being part of Europe- well, we've always known that would be his line. He didn't trumpet it during the campaign but he was never really anti-EU. Joining the campaign for personal reasons makes him an absolute fucker, but it might also make him a better person to negotiate the exit than a genuine anti-EU PM would be, which is a potential silver lining I'm clinging to for now.

No, no, no. I mean it's one thing to put a certain spin on things, to try to convince people form your point of view/get elected. To view things through idelogical classes if you will. 

But Boris and Trump are something completely different. But let's stick with the Boris, this is the UK thread afterall. The Boris either has no convictions, or is willing to drop through them so willingly over the board on the campaign trail, that they don't really matter.  Or in short, he will say and do anything to get elected. But getting into power, for the sake to be into power is somewhat hollow, and you really don't know what he will actually do. What's next on the Boris school of politics and policy? Camps for non-British citizens with a net worth below 3 mil? Will he draw a line somewhere, or will he really do anything? And it is somewhat along the line with Donald Trump just said that to win the primary, he won't enact anything he said if he gets elected. 

That you are so easily dismissing it as meh, it's just what politicians do, is something I find really troubling. I think, we should hold politicians accountable for what they say, and what they do. 

[mormont]

16 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Absolutely agree. That is my position as well. This also makes it more possible for like minded people to cluster together in communities that largely represent their way of life, values and norms. The more localized you can make your government the less chance of being ruled over by the masses of people who live far away under very different conditions and according to very different lifestyles to yourself.

And it also makes it easier to choose where you want to live and who you want to associate with. Self determination at the most basic level.

Insularity is not a virtue.

[Andrés Garcia]

Insularity need not follow though.

[Free Northman Reborn]

8 minutes ago, Emre Mor-mont said:

Insularity is not a virtue.

Freedom of association does not equate to insularity.

[mormont]

Just now, Free Northman Reborn said:

Freedom of association does not equate to insularity.

What you have described is word-for-word insularity. If we lived in a world such as you have described, we'd all be poorer as human beings. I'm very grateful that we don't.

[Free Northman Reborn]

1 minute ago, Emre Mor-mont said:

What you have described is word-for-word insularity. If we lived in a world such as you have described, we'd all be poorer as human beings. I'm very grateful that we don't.

Well, I respectfully disagree.

[polishgenius]

21 minutes ago, Notone said:

That you are so easily dismissing it as meh, it's just what politicians do, is something I find really troubling. I think, we should hold politicians accountable for what they say, and what they do. 

I think we should too. I just think that linking Boris and Trump because they've both lied doesn't work at all. It's one thing to put a spin on things, but lots of politicians have just straight up lied too. Cameron and Osbourne have been doing it for years with the whole 'it's better together' thing. Blair turns out to have done it in his 1997 campaign pledges, hardly any of which came true. It's not a unique thing that Boris has done.

And it's really not comparable to Trump's wall, it's just not. Boris hasn't said something completely insane with no hope of implementation - he's jumped onto a bandwagon he probably doesn't really believe in and tried to hijack it, and in some ways that might make him more dangerous than Trump because he actually knows what he's doing and is quite willing to manipulate his way into power, but on the other hand he's not actually insane. I don't know what he will do, but I'm fairly sure about some things he won't do - or say he will do- and building walls and creating camps are among them.


I'm not trying to justify him or anything. I just don't see how that comparison is useful at all. They're both conservative and have funny hair. That's about it.

[Fragile Bird]

We already know that the UK was going to take a hit to it's credit rating, but S&P just made it official and downgraded your credit from Triple A to Double Aplus, with a Negative outlook.  There was a warning given that this could happen back in February.

The rating is the same that the US has, except that the US has a 'Stable' outlook, not a 'Negative' outlook.

Normally a downgrade like this would result in a drop in the price of bonds resulting in an increase in the interest rate, but the price has actually gone up with a drop in the interest being paid. Don't be reassured by this, however, the price of UK bonds has been going up because so many people are dumping equities and buying bonds instead.

[James Arryn]

3 hours ago, Andrés Garcia said:

You make some good points. I'm fervently against the EU, but for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with immigration. In fact, I'm an open border kind of guy. I just think that democracies should be very local and small. People should vote on things that directly affect them. They should be able to feel the influence of their vote to a larger degree. Their representatives, in so far as they need any, should not be too removed geographically, socially, and economically speaking. I want our strategy for getting rid of nation states to be directed downwards rather than upwards. I therefore believe that any development towards big supranational states, modern empires in effect, is dangerous and not in line with the ideals I associate with democracy. These are very strong values that I have that I can't put to the side just to spite some bigoted assholes.

I can respect this, excepting the last line, slightly. It's a bit more than not spitting bigoted assholes. It's not enabling them, not empowering their vision. Remember that the victims of their desired outcome are other human beings...so, like all political choices, the outcomes/allies of those choices, however ideologically coincidental, must be part of your decision. 

For an admittedly extreme example, many people supported the Nazis without the slightest hint of anti-semitisim or indeed racism of any kind. Some felt strongly about law and order, otjers felt righteous indignation about Versailles, etc.

But the choices were not made in vacuums, because politics.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

I must admit, I am somewhat entertained. 

Cameron: "We won't invoke Article 50 before we negotiated terms."

Rest of Europe: "There won't and can't be any negotiations before Britain invokes Article 50."  

[Slick Mongoose]

I think the remain campaign have massively understated the economic consequences of leaving.

I hope i'm wrong.

 

[SamanthaofHodorsfield]

I don't think it was so much the remain camp understating the consequences; more that they did, were accused of scaremongering and dooms-daying and then dismissed by the leave camp.

[Pebble thats Stubby]

9 minutes ago, SamanthaofHodorsfield said:

I don't think it was so much the remain camp understating the consequences; more that they did, were accused of scaremongering and dooms-daying and then dismissed by the leave camp.

this so much   "project fear, LA LA LA LA"  *fingers in ears.*  was the normal response whenever I dared to mention that things things could be difficult.   This was without getting the chance to explain why they could be difficult or what difficult meant.

 

Brexiters just did not want to know.

[Isis]

3 hours ago, The BlackBear said:

Nope, Britain is to do with Geography. Northern Irish folks are UK but not British. So they aren't synonymous.

What the actual fuck are you talking about? What nationality do you think people who were born in NI are then? What passport do you think they hold? 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Wow, now the Rating Agencies have a go at the UK. This is starting to get really ugly.