Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Spockydog

UK Politics: What Goes DUP Must Come Down

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Apparently, JRM, now that the DUP are definitely not joining the party, has decided that, actually, Mrs May's deal is just as bad as he always said it was.

Honest to god, these fucking people. :ack:

Edited by Spockydog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Corbyn showed the sort of decisiveness we've come to expect from him by abstaining on the 'Revoke article 50 two days before Britain would leave the EU without a deal' vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Werthead said:

To be far, an increasingly large number of Western countries are broken and suffering from the same problem: the supremacy of ego and feelings over facts.

In the case of Brexit, the people voting in favour of Brexit did so for emotional reasons: they wanted to "sock it to the elites" and pay people back for austerity and do something "edgy" that made them feel good.

To be fair, the smugness of many present-day politicians -which every once in a while evolves into open contempt for the average joe- and some elements of the media *is* infuriating. Combine that with some misperceptions about the EU and it's easy for people to fall into unreasonable hatred. Not to mention the fact that the interests of a large portion of the population *are* in fact ignored election after election and that demagoguery is so common that many have lost trust in our institutions (European or national).
The EU isn't responsible for as many evils as many might think, but politicians have done a pretty good job of blaming it whenever it was convenient.
Of course, most people on this forum are aware that emotional reactions end up hurting those who give in to them and that it's better to keep analysing things in a level-headed manner... But it *can* be difficult. Brexit or Trumpism are symptoms of deeper problems that are not addressed because it would imply calling into question the way our representative democracies function - if not their underlying socio-economic structure. If you're only directly asking for people's opinions once per decade on a specific issue (via referendum) you can't be surprised that many will use that opportunity to reject whatever the establishment seems to be defending.
It is ironic that something like Brexit may illustrate the fact that many people actually want more democracy, i.e. to have a genuine chance of having a say in political decisions that affect their lives -rather than electing decision-takers every five years or so. Ironic, because of course Brexit will be used by the cynics against direct democracy... Ironic because with few means of affecting the political and economic process, many will conclude that the few means they have are worthless. It's a vicious circle that is dangerous to say the least. Thing is, most politicians seem unaware or unconcerned of such dangers, with some even trying to use them for their own self-interest. I'm afraid that as bad as Brexit is there can still be much worse to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I know the EU is granting an extension until the 12th April even in the case of no deal, but does that need to be officially implemented by Parliament actually passing a motion? In other words, is the date formally moved to the 12th April or are we actually under 48 hours from a no deal crash out if nothing is passed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, karaddin said:

So I know the EU is granting an extension until the 12th April even in the case of no deal, but does that need to be officially implemented by Parliament actually passing a motion? In other words, is the date formally moved to the 12th April or are we actually under 48 hours from a no deal crash out if nothing is passed?

I think that was the one of the thing that did get voted on yesterday and passed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pebble said:

I think that was the one of the thing that did get voted on yesterday and passed.

Ah good. Small mercies etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Spockydog said:...unless you're Boris Johnson, self-proclaimed leader of the Grand Jizzards, sending out yet another racist dog-whistle to your fawning rabble of gullible, racist cunts.

In that scenario, it makes a tonne of sense.

 

Johnson reckons he's a wizard beneath the sheets.

 

6 hours ago, Nothing Has Changed said:

O come off it. I agree with HoI. This 'Grand Wizards' thing has been blown up to ludicrous and asinine proportions. They're not trying to send out racist dog whistles by calling themselves 'Grand Wizards.' At worst its probably a bit of self-deprecating humour at what a bunch of goons they're being. 

Anyway, that vote for the third referendum was very encouraging indeed. It got the highest number of votes but the margin for the customs union was bigger.

The customs union thing is sort of sensible in a way but also totally daft because May's deal does include a customs union (the all-UK backstop). Putting the customs union in the PD just splits the Tory party while actually doing less to guarantee the CU outcome than the current treaty. It's madness if this is actually the solution. And it does not really fit well with a third referendum either, if you're going to have another referendum it would be best for May's deal to go up against Remain, as that will be perceived as a bit more Brexity than May's deal + CU, even though, as I said, I struggle to see any real practical difference. 

I am chuffed the pathetic Boles plan and Labour's piece of drivel failed so badly though. The House proved more sensible than I thought; soft Brexit is a bad idea, it solves nothing.

It's not a particularly good result for a second refererendum, given that Labour whipped, and the Conservatives did not, and senior ministers abstained. .  27 Labour Mp's still voted against, as did four ex-Labour.  Only 8 Conservatives voted in favour.  On a normal, whipped, vote, 345 or so would vote against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

If they wanted to go all Harry Potter reference they would call themselves the Wizengamot and JRM as the Chief Warlock.

Grand Wizard is a very specific title, and one quick Google of it tells you that in the modern era it's pretty exclusively a KKK title. The likelihood of it being a coincidence is pretty low.

Though I will admit that on page 2 of my Google search I did find a non-KKK related Grand Wizard reference, so it's possible JRM is a big fan of the Worst Witch Franchise https://theworstwitch.fandom.com/wiki/Egbert_Hellibore and its Grand Wizard. He might also be a fan of Eric Cartman's Grand Wizard persona, though given one if his most memorable quotes is apparently "Jews can't be paladins" I'm not sure it's all that much better of an association.

 

It was a toss up between Grand Wizard, Grand Moff, SS Gruppenfuhrer, Arch Lector, and Chief Rabbit

Edited by SeanF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Pebble said:

2 weeks is still too effing close considering the mess we are in.

 

I don't want to live in such Interesting Times.

Far far too close. I was starting to worry that the crash was going to happen because people just too the extension for granted. Which sounds like a stupid thing to worry about but *gestures at the clusterfuck*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

This has always been the case. Feelings matter more than facts to most people. If think making decisions on facts rather than feelings is rule rather than the exception, then I have a bridge over the Thames I would like to sell you. I think the illusion is that most people think they are making emotionless fact-based decisions. The only consistent fact about how people behave and act is what they are feeling at the time.

And the problem with Brexit is that there were little to no facts to base an opinion on from either side so it was all emotion.

For what it's worth I'm with Heartofice on the Grand Wizard thing.  I have only heard the term in documentaries.  It's likely the politicians knew the KKK reference but didn't think the term belonged exclusively to that group and aren't using it to associate themselves with anything to do with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mosi Mynn said:

And the problem with Brexit is that there were little to no facts to base an opinion on from either side so it was all emotion.

For what it's worth I'm with Heartofice on the Grand Wizard thing.  I have only heard the term in documentaries.  It's likely the politicians knew the KKK reference but didn't think the term belonged exclusively to that group and aren't using it to associate themselves with anything to do with them.

Of course people vote with their hearts not their heads. We all know that. But at the same time lets not pretend that behaviour is only confined certain demographics. Remainers are voting emotionally just as much as leavers in that regards. It call comes down to your very own perception of the EU on that matter. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Of course people vote with their hearts not their heads. We all know that. But at the same time lets not pretend that behaviour is only confined certain demographics. Remainers are voting emotionally just as much as leavers in that regards. It call comes down to your very own perception of the EU on that matter. 
 

I'm not pretending anything.  There was fear mongering from both sides during the referendum. 

Having said that, I can list a number of benefits of being in the EU , but I'm struggling to see any pluses in leaving - except that the press and the politicians won't be able to blame it for all our woes any more!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

May I make it VERY FUCKING clear that Gove suggesting Ireland (Rep of) having their goods checked on the continent is NOT helpful. We like our customs union. We are not muppets. Don’t try and drag us out because you (MPs) are idiots who can’t get your shit together.

Edited by Deedles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Mosi Mynn said:

I'm not pretending anything.  There was fear mongering from both sides during the referendum. 

Having said that, I can list a number of benefits of being in the EU , but I'm struggling to see any pluses in leaving - except that the press and the politicians won't be able to blame it for all our woes any more!

From the leave side there are plenty of pluses to leaving. Much of the downsides relate not to being outside the EU but the actual process of leaving and the time period from transitioning away to being independent.

- Being outside of the ‘ ever closer union’. This gets over stated by leavers but it’s clearly the direction of movement for the EU, you can see that in the words of Junker and Macron, and it makes sense if you are the EU to create a power bloc to rival China and Russia. Maybe some Europeans have no problem with this, a Britain with a big history and a sense of self would probably not want to be part of that. Any promises by the EU that we wouldn’t need to be ring quite hollow and I have little doubt that we would be subsumed into a larger more centralised bloc at some point. We have already handed over political power to the EU over the years without being asked and without  people noticing and it would probably happen again.

- Having an independent global trade policy that benefits the UK. The EU has been poor at conducting Trade deals, barely managing to complete any with major nations and usually having being stalled due to competing interests inside the EU. It’s also debatable that those deals suit us as they have to designed around different countries differing economies. 

A large portion of our trade is with countries outside the EU or with countries the EU doesn’t have deals with and it’s growing all the time, in fact our share of trade with the EU fell by about 11% in a decade. 

Rather than portraying a leave vote as an insular walling off of Britain from the rest of the world, it is seen by many leavers as a vote to become a more outward facing country free to shape itself in the way it chooses.

Of course the problem with all this is that the inability to agree trade deals before you leave the EU means that you end up with WTO rules, which may or may not be as bad as claimed, but it is the transition to FTAs that is the problem ( not to mention that we have proved ourselves to be very poor negotiators so far with confused leadership)

- Control of immigration. The big ticket item for many. Free movement in Europe has really meant that rather than Europeans moving wherever they want, it has mostly huge numbers leaving poorer nations and migrating to the richer ones to make money. The greedy over expansion of EU has only made the issue worse. Rather than this being an issue of racism it is about Britain not being able to set its own rules on immigration, and that when people were shocked about the enormous numbers of people arriving they were told that nothing could be done.  Of course it’s debatable that immigration would go down after Brexit, but then at least we’d have the ability to change it.

-  Our parliamentary system has proven itself to be a bit of a disaster during this whole process, but at the very least it has some semblance of democracy at work. The EU is a democracy in only the faintest of senses, and is becoming less democratic over time as it changes its voting laws , removing vetos on tax policy for example. The European Commission is largely unelected and yet it creates and decides what legislation to put forward, it ultimately decides the direction of travel of the EU.

if you apply Tony benns five questions to the EU it doesn’t come out looking very good. 

"What power have you got?

"Where did you get it from?

"In whose interests do you use it?

"To whom are you accountable?

"How do we get rid of you?"

"Anyone who cannot answer the last of those questions does not live in a democratic system."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw these are not exactly my views on the matter though I have a great deal of sympathy for them. I think that our currently conflicted nature has meant that leaving the EU has proven impossible. 

I have serious reservations about the way the EU is run and it’s goals and I’d rather the UK wasn’t involved, preferring the purely trade relationship we originally signed up to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

snip

Thank you for taking the time to lay all this out in such a reasonable and easy to understand way.

This is the sort of non-hysterical reasoning we could have used in 2016! ;)

Similarly, I wish the remain side had put forward the pros to staying in the Union, rather than a) assuming they would win, and b) using scare tactics.

I, for one, would really appreciate a well-informed debate on the EU and our part in it, laying out all the good things it does for us, and the reservations against the ever-closer union. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

- Being outside of the ‘ ever closer union’.

This is pretty much the definition of a circular argument. Being out of the EU is a benefit of being out of the EU. Of course, if you don't want to remain in an organization you might find some solace in leaving, but this isn't really a "benefit".

27 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

- Having an independent global trade policy that benefits the UK. The EU has been poor at conducting Trade deals, barely managing to complete any with major nations and usually having being stalled due to competing interests inside the EU. It’s also debatable that those deals suit us as they have to designed around different countries differing economies.

Citation needed! I personally think the EU has been fairly successful with its trade negotiations, but to the point that it's a matter of opinion and you might think otherwise, whether the UK does better or worse in its negotiations outside of the EU in the future is pure speculation (and there's good reason to believe that, having considerably less negotiating power than the far bigger block of the EU, it will fare considerably worse).

30 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

- Control of immigration. The big ticket item for many. Free movement in Europe has really meant that rather than Europeans moving wherever they want, it has mostly huge numbers leaving poorer nations and migrating to the richer ones to make money.

Yes. Being outside of the EU will indeed mean if you want to stop foreigners from coming to your country you will be able to. It won't make the people living in the UK any better off, because the economic side of the argument is completely fallacious, but you can keep Eastern Europeans (or any Europeans for that matter), out of the UK if you want to. This argument is appallingly mean spirited, though, and many British people have decided to make a home or a living elsewhere in Europe in the past (including many retired people, who generally consume quite a lot of public services while paying relatively little taxes). I hope they were, and continue to be, welcome. I don't mean to be rude, but in my mind, this is only a "benefit" if you're a jerk.

39 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

-  Our parliamentary system has proven itself to be a bit of a disaster during this whole process, but at the very least it has some semblance of democracy at work. The EU is a democracy in only the faintest of senses

The EU is composed of four main decision making bodies: the EU parliament (which is elected directly by citizens in elections), the European Council (which is formed by EU members Heads of Government, so May, Macron, Merkel et al), the EU Council (which is formed by EU members Ministers) and the Comission (the president of the Comission is elected by the EU parliament; the president then appoints the rest of the members; the EU parliament must ratify the final Comission and can force it to stand down via a vote of no confidence if it's displeased with its work). It is a democratic organization. Representative democracy is not without its issues and problems (as Rippounet points out), but these are not exclusive to the EU, but a much broader issue.

All of Tony Benns questions have answers regarding the EU. You just have to know how it works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mentat said:

This is pretty much the definition of a circular argument. Being out of the EU is a benefit of being out of the EU. Of course, if you don't want to remain in an organization you might find some solace in leaving, but this isn't really a "benefit".

Citation needed! I personally think the EU has been fairly successful with its trade negotiations, but to the point that it's a matter of opinion and you might think otherwise, whether the UK does better or worse in its negotiations outside of the EU in the future is pure speculation (and there's good reason to believe that, having considerably less negotiating power than the far bigger block of the EU, it will fare considerably worse).

Yes. Being outside of the EU will indeed mean if you want to stop foreigners from coming to your country you will be able to. It won't make the people living in the UK any better off, because the economic side of the argument is completely fallacious, but you can keep Eastern Europeans (or any Europeans for that matter), out of the UK if you want to. This argument is appallingly mean spirited, though, and many British people have decided to make a home or a living elsewhere in Europe in the past (including many retired people, who generally consume quite a lot of public services while paying relatively little taxes). I hope they were, and continue to be, welcome. I don't mean to be rude, but in my mind, this is only a "benefit" if you're a jerk.

The EU is composed of four main decision making bodies: the EU parliament (which is elected directly by citizens in elections), the European Council (which is formed by EU members Heads of Government, so May, Macron, Merkel et al), the EU Council (which is formed by EU members Ministers) and the Comission (the president of the Comission is elected by the EU parliament; the president then appoints the rest of the members; the EU parliament must ratify the final Comission and can force it to stand down via a vote of no confidence if it's displeased with its work). It is a democratic organization. Representative democracy is not without its issues and problems (as Rippounet points out), but these are not exclusive to the EU, but a much broader issue.

All of Tony Benns questions have answers regarding the EU. You just have to know how it works.

Being outside ever closer union is a plus if you value independence and accountable government, but a minus if you want to project more power than any individual nation can (other than superpowers).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mentat said:

This is pretty much the definition of a circular argument. Being out of the EU is a benefit of being out of the EU. Of course, if you don't want to remain in an organization you might find some solace in leaving, but this isn't really a "benefit".

I think arguments could be made against joining an ever-closer union.  For example, I would not want the UK to be part of the Euro, which I assume is what an ever-closer union will eventually mean.

Quote

Yes. Being outside of the EU will indeed mean if you want to stop foreigners from coming to your country you will be able to. It won't make the people living in the UK any better off, because the economic side of the argument is completely fallacious, but you can keep Eastern Europeans (or any Europeans for that matter), out of the UK if you want to. This argument is appallingly mean spirited, though, and many British people have decided to make a home or a living elsewhere in Europe in the past (including many retired people, who generally consume quite a lot of public services while paying relatively little taxes). I hope they were, and continue to be, welcome. I don't mean to be rude, but in my mind, this is only a "benefit" if you're a jerk.

It might be about "foreigners" for some people, but I think for a lot of other people it's about uncontrollable immigration.  Some people are not OK with not having UK controls at UK borders.  

Quote

 

The EU is composed of four main decision making bodies: the EU parliament (which is elected directly by citizens in elections), the European Council (which is formed by EU members Heads of Government, so May, Macron, Merkel et al), the EU Council (which is formed by EU members Ministers) and the Comission (the president of the Comission is elected by the EU parliament; the president then appoints the rest of the members; the EU parliament must ratify the final Comission and can force it to stand down via a vote of no confidence if it's displeased with its work). It is a democratic organization. Representative democracy is not without its issues and problems (as Rippounet points out), but these are not exclusive to the EU, but a much broader issue.

All of Tony Benns questions have answers regarding the EU. You just have to know how it works.

 

I think the EU was set up to one of the most democratic organisations on the planet.  That's not a problem.  The problem is your last point: it takes time to learn how all the parts fit together and how they work.  There has been a long anti-EU campaign in the UK, and a lot of us don't know how it works and can't be arsed to find out,

Euro aside, I'm fairly pro-the EU, and Brexit has made me find out more about it and the people who work in it.  It is a noble endeavour and it is worth preserving.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×