Jump to content
Chaircat Meow

UK Politics: And Brexit came swirling down

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, A wilding said:

Indeed, the votes of these people matter. And the combination you mention of their "worsening situation" and "religious cult" like attitude is why I fear a further lurch to the right.

I'm not really seeing a lurch to the right or one happening in the future. The dividing lines between left and right don't mean very much any more. I think that once Brexit has happened those areas will at least feel like they have been listened to, it isn't a bunch of London liberals telling them they are all racists and 'deplorables'. I can't see any reason for them to lurch to the right. Anti immigration sentiment has fallen massively once it became clear Brexit was going to happen and control of border would be brought back to the UK. 

7 minutes ago, A wilding said:

As a middle class SE England small "l" liberal I probably count as one on those "Liberal Londoners" you refer to. And yet, while I voted tactically for them last month because of the critical situation (and do now have a Labour MP) I am not a Labour supporter and currently think it unlikely I will vote for them in the next GE. That may be another measure of how far Labour now need to go.

With Corbyn gone and a strong leader they would have a much better chance. They have been a terrible party of opposition for a very long time, before Corbyn. Unfortunately none of their candidates look like that strong leader, all have massive failings one way or another. 

Share this post


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

'm not really seeing a lurch to the right or one happening in the future. The dividing lines between left and right don't mean very much any more. I think that once Brexit has happened those areas will at least feel like they have been listened to, it isn't a bunch of London liberals telling them they are all racists and 'deplorables'. I can't see any reason for them to lurch to the right. Anti immigration sentiment has fallen massively once it became clear Brexit was going to happen and control of border would be brought back to the UK. 

Hm. Instead of your "London Liberals" we have a naked populist who has encouraged their racism and nationalism, and who has made promises (money, jobs, a better NHS) that I don't personally see how he can keep, even if he wants to. Hence my fear.

Also, on what grounds do you say "Anti immigration sentiment has fallen massively"? And we will see what "control of border" actually happens, especially as the immigration most people are against is from the Indian subcontinent and has little or nothing to do with the UK's membership of the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, A wilding said:

Hm. Instead of your "London Liberals" we have a naked populist who has encouraged their racism and nationalism, and who has made promises (money, jobs, a better NHS) that I don't personally see how he can keep, even if he wants to. Hence my fear.

Also, on what grounds do you say "Anti immigration sentiment has fallen massively"? And we will see what "control of border" actually happens, especially as the immigration most people are against is from the Indian subcontinent and has little or nothing to do with the UK's membership of the EU.

Not sure if you purposely wrote the most 'London Liberal' type of post there as some sort of parody, but it was hauntingly accurate.

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/#kp2

When I say anti immigration sentiment, what I was actually referring to was that concern about immigration has dropped, although like most places Brits would prefer less immigration.
 

Quote

 The increasing rate of immigration from the EU since the accession of the “A8 countries” to the EU was accompanied by a clear change in public mood between 2001 and 2016. Immigration was displaced as primary concern by the economy during the recession years but quickly returned to prominence.

Since the EU Referendum in June 2016, however, immigration has been mentioned by far fewer people, falling from 48% in June 2016 to 21% in December 2017.

 

Share this post


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

Not sure if you purposely wrote the most 'London Liberal' type of post there as some sort of parody, but it was hauntingly accurate

So would you like to actually address some of the facts in that paragraph?

 

28 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/#kp2

When I say anti immigration sentiment, what I was actually referring to was that concern about immigration has dropped, although like most places Brits would prefer less immigration.

Interesting website, thanks. I note how the part you quoted continues:

Quote

Since the EU Referendum in June 2016, however, immigration has been mentioned by far fewer people, falling from 48% in June 2016 to 21% in December 2017. Over this same period, it is perhaps not surprising that Europe/ the EU has increased in salience. As of December 2017, 46% mentioned this as a concern ...

so it feels basically like a change in emphasis rather than attitude.

Also I see the last section:

Quote

 

Evidence gaps and limitations

Some of the evidence base comes from questions about ‘immigrants’ or ‘immigration’, terms which are defined vaguely or not at all, and likely to be envisioned differently in the minds of different respondents (Blinder 2015). While official government statistics on net migration define a long-term international migrant as anyone who comes to the UK to stay for at least one year, it is not clear whether or how the public distinguishes migrants from others such as short-term visitors, naturalised British citizens, ‘second generation migrants’ (children of migrants who themselves are actually native-born British), and ethnic or religious minorities generally. Furthermore, in a media environment that often conflates categories such as refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants (Baker et al. 2008), there is a danger that survey respondents’ expressed opinions are based on an image of immigration that highlights only a subset of the full array of migrants to the UK.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, A wilding said:

So would you like to actually address some of the facts in that paragraph?

Which facts?

5 minutes ago, A wilding said:

so it feels basically like a change in emphasis rather than attitude.

Yes, that was what I was referring to. Immigration is much less of a concern for people now that Brexit has happened and they appear to have been listened to. 

Share this post


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

The sweaty child rapist is still a Royal Highness though?

He is mommy's favourite boy, so it will be over her dead body that Andrew will loose his Royal Highness style.

Harry and Meghan will not loose their Royal Highness styles either, they will merely will give up using those styles. It reeks of a precautionary measure when the two of them have changed their minds when they have found out the hard way that life outside the Royal Family is not all peaches and cream. .

Share this post


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

The sweaty child rapist is still a Royal Highness though?

Be fair, it's not like Prince Andrew touched his pregnant belly, wore black nail polish or caused drought, famine and pestilence by eating an avocado.

Wouldn't it be nice if the British tabloids had five seconds of reflection about their priorities or whether killing one of their golden geese was really the best business strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Wall Flower said:

Wouldn't it be nice if the British tabloids had five seconds of reflection about their priorities or whether killing one of their golden geese was really the best business strategy.

The British tabloids were out to hound Meghan out of the country, they painfully obviously did not expect Harry go along with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tabloids are driven by money. Stories about the Royals sell and royal weddings are rare. So, most of their footage is gossip. But the culprit, if you need to blame somebody, is the British public, particularly the people who buy tabloids.

As for Harry and Meghan, apparently they keep their titles as Royal Highnesses, but won't use them anymore. Whatever that means. And according to the Guardian, the queen didn't particularly like their attempt at being part time Royals and effectively fired them.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/18/harry-meghan-buckingham-palace-deal-analysis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Loge said:

Tabloids are driven by money. Stories about the Royals sell and royal weddings are rare. So, most of their footage is gossip. But the culprit, if you need to blame somebody, is the British public, particularly the people who buy tabloids.

 

I've always found this line of thinking a bit too easy. I mean, you can justify anything with it. Drug dealing, selling weapons, fraud, child pornography, bad food. No responsibility for the supplier. "I just supplied what was obviously in demand. If I didn't do it, someone else would."

As for tabloids and other media (and not just of the yellow press kind), the worse they get, the more people expect them to be. And sadly, this has far-reaching consequences, not just for the likes of Royals or celebs.

Edited by Mindwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/19/there-is-a-reason-why-royals-demonised-but-wont-read-all-about-it-prince-harry-meghan-markle

Quote

Who really knows what is going on with Harry and Meghan? But we can be sure the storytellers, the press, are hardly disinterested observers

 

But trust in this third dimension is further compromised by the fact that none of the major players filtering this story for our consumption is exactly a disinterested bystander. All three of the major newspaper groups most obsessed with Harry and Meghan are themselves being sued by the couple for assorted breaches of privacy and copyright. There is, to any reasonable eyes, a glaring conflict of interest that, for the most part, goes undeclared.

For some years now – largely unreported – two chancery court judges have been dealing with literally hundreds of cases of phone hacking against MGN Ltd and News Group, the owners, respectively, of the Daily Mirror and the Sun (as well as the defunct News of the World).

The two publishers are, between them, forking out eye-watering sums to avoid any cases going to trial in open court. Because the newspaper industry lobbied so forcefully to scrap the second part of the Leveson inquiry, which had been due to shine a light on such matters, we can only surmise what is going on.

But there are clues. Mirror Group (now Reach) had by July 2018 set aside more than £70m to settle phone-hacking claims without risking any of them getting to court. The BBC reported last year that the Murdoch titles had paid out an astonishing £400m in damages and calculated that the total bill for the two companies could eventually reach £1bn.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF is Jess Phillip's talking about. That's the way to win the next election, show the electorate that you are just as loony as they thought you were. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×