A Political Thread pt. 2

[McTallshort]

The SNP are not happy because there was a deal.

A no deal was perfect for them to push for a second referendum and they could offer fisheries as way to EU membership despite Scotlands deficit

 

[Reiser99]

The SNP are not happy because there was a deal.

A no deal was perfect for them to push for a second referendum and they could offer fisheries as way to EU membership despite Scotlands deficit

SNP were never going to be happy. Question is how will Scottish voters react? If they want independence and Johnson refuses then it might just strengthen the SNP

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

None of the parties in Northern Ireland are happy with the deal. DUP hate the Irish Sea Border and the rest of the main parties wanted to remain.

Wales First Minister say it's not what was promised https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-55435491

SNP in Scotland are not happy with the deal https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-blasts-disastrous-brexit-23216196.amp

Hardly taking back control of the fish when there is a 5 year transition and EU vessels still get to fish in UK waters.

EU officials which be present at the Irish Sea Border for customs purposes, in Northern Ireland.

Taken back control of the trade, yet have to follow EU regulations on products (if I'm wrong correct me).

Still going to need to follow EU rules to be allowed into their security network group.

Seen a lot of people online who previously suggested No Deal was the only Brexit, but now claim this deal is the true Brexit.

It's not as hard as I thought it would be, and not as soft as it could be. It's a middle brexit.

One thing I thought was telling was the difference in the speeches by UK and EU leaders. Ursula von der Leyen provided a great speech. Boris Johnson was full of soundbites and embarrassing - take the fishy tie for example.

Are you surprised opposition parties are in opposition to Tory policy? I hardly think that's a suprise / significant.

We originally said 3 years in fishing and they wanted 14.5 so the 5 years is a big win on that front in my book ( I would have preferred less but hey ho)

We don't have to follow all EU regs, but if there is significant divergence by either party, we or the EU can go to a third party arbitrator In order for tarrifs to be decided which the arbitrator will mediate and make sure are proportional. Works both ways and only for extreme divergence really.

I actually thought Johnson performed better in that presser than he has in a very long time

 

[TRF_Olyy]

not as hard as I thought it would be, and not as soft as it could be. It's a middle brexit.

Which they're touting as an excellent deal because they've been making everyone think we'd be out with a no deal for ages.

Glad we've got a deal, and interested to see exactly what it entails, but it's like finding out you're having one leg amputated rather than two.
Would rather I still had both.

 

[Reiser99]

So now that we have a deal that is supposedly great (unless a certain Mr Smith realises in a years time that he should have read it) deal, regained our sovereignty that we already had, have taken control of our borders that we already had and we have left the E.U, who are the conservatives and their right wing media allies going to blame when things go ***s up now?

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I'm sure all the fishing stuff matters hugely to those involved, but given it seemed to be the final stumbling block the one thing that's made me laugh out loud recently was the Guardian citing the FT saying that fishing adds as much to the UK ecomony as........Harrods!

Time will tell how good this deal is, but for now have as good a Christmas as you all can.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

I'm sure all the fishing stuff matters hugely to those involved, but given it seemed to be the final stumbling block the one thing that's made me laugh out loud recently was the Guardian citing the FT saying that fishing adds as much to the UK ecomony as........Harrods!

Time will tell how good this deal is, but for now have as good a Christmas as you all can.

It was about principle as well I think. A very tangible demonstration of sovereignty. Also a major interest of the EU, so no matter how statistically significant to us, that immediately makes it hugely important

 

[ncurd]

Useful to see just how much we've given up.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

It was about principle as well I think. A very tangible demonstration of sovereignty. Also a major interest of the EU, so no matter how statistically significant to us, that immediately makes it hugely important

Shows how weak Brexit is that you need to show that though. The EU has gotten the most affected country in the union, Ireland, absolutely everything that we need with this deal and has set themselves up for a very smooth transition for Brexit. It's very obvious which side is best to be on in my opinion and all the gusto coming from Westminster and Number 10 only adds to my assertion that it's not with them.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Shows how weak Brexit is that you need to show that though. The EU has gotten the most affected country in the union, Ireland, absolutely everything that we need with this deal and has set themselves up for a very smooth transition for Brexit. It's very obvious which side is best to be on in my opinion and all the gusto coming from Westminster and Number 10 only adds to my assertion that it's not with them.

I don't think so, much of Brexit was about sovereignty rather than pure economics so it makes sense that ensuring the former was a core part of the negotiations.

In the short term I do think there will be pain and annoyance with red tape etc and some very minor hardship for seed potato farmers but in the long term we'll be fine, and with good governance (in the next couple decades) will be better off for this.

Just for clarity - I was actively involved in the remain campaign at the time, but a combo of personal negotiator info, Cameron's book and the EUs bad faith negotiation (mutual I know) have soured my opinion of it somewhat

 

[TRF_Olyy]

wtf does sovereignity even mean
It's just a buzz word thrown around, same as the whole fishing thing
Mention it in the news enough and people start thinking it matters

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

wtf does sovereignity even mean
It's just a buzz word thrown around, same as the whole fishing thing
Mention it in the news enough and people start thinking it matters

Honestly as a politics student that word gives me PTSD, it's not just a random buzz word and it does matter.

The idea of parliamentary sovereignty is HUGELY important especially with the UKs uncodified constitution and I am personally of the opinion that it was largely pooled with the EU rather than given away but that's an ongoing debate.

It's about the authority to rule oneself and is a fundamental of not only international law but almost all domestic law too

 

[Reiser99]

I don't think so, much of Brexit was about sovereignty rather than pure economics so it makes sense that ensuring the former was a core part of the negotiations.

In the short term I do think there will be pain and annoyance with red tape etc and some very minor hardship for seed potato farmers but in the long term we'll be fine, and with good governance (in the next couple decades) will be better off for this.

Just for clarity - I was actively involved in the remain campaign at the time, but a combo of personal negotiator info, Cameron's book and the EUs bad faith negotiation (mutual I know) have soured my opinion of it somewhat

Good governance being a key issue there.

Also I've never understood the view that the E.U negotiated in bad faith. We started at their red line, which was we wanted all of the benefits of the single market with none of the downsides. They literally couldn't concede anything at that point because we were trying to do the one thing they couldn't accept, which was to undermine the single market. All this has ever been about what the U.K is willing to have to give up the same level of access that it used to have.

 

[ncurd]

The problem with sovereignty is it has been reduced to a meaningless buzzword. People want to bang in about it but can't actually put any detail behind why it's a good or bad thing. Take how EU laws are made which requires a democratically elected parliament and agreement between nations who then don't use their veto. People say ah but we should make our own laws but few can barely articulate to why that's better than the EU deciding it. Only they don't like and something to do with a flag and the place they were born.

Those same people then have an issue when somewhere like Scotland want to have further control within its borders of how it determines itself (I've also never been able to resolve the SNP want to exit the UK and join the EU).

Plus any trade agreement involves some giving up of sovereignty trade inherently relies on it because if you want manufacture something for a foreign market it had to confirm to their rules. Part of what has made this so complicated outside of fish it regulatory alignment and making sure the EU and UK stay in level step with one another.

It why the EU has to be a political/judicial entity as well as trade there are too many working parts.


This is all pretty complex and philosophical stuff but few (if any) people on the Brexit side have done much more than partake in nationalistic saber rattling.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

The problem with sovereignty is it has been reduced to a meaningless buzzword. People want to bang in about it but can't actually put any detail behind why it's a good or bad thing. Take how EU laws are made which requires a democratically elected parliament and agreement between nations who then don't use their veto. People say ah but we should make our own laws but few can barely articulate to why that's better than the EU deciding it. Only they don't like and something to do with a flag and the place they were born.

Those same people then have an issue when somewhere like Scotland want to have further control within its borders of how it determines itself (I've also never been able to resolve the SNP want to exit the UK and join the EU).

Plus any trade agreement involves some giving up of sovereignty trade inherently relies on it because if you want manufacture something for a foreign market it had to confirm to their rules. Part of what has made this so complicated outside of fish it regulatory alignment and making sure the EU and UK stay in level step with one another.

It why the EU has to be a political/judicial entity as well as trade there are too many working parts.


This is all pretty complex and philosophical stuff but few (if any) people on the Brexit side have done much more than partake in nationalistic saber rattling.

The last paragraph of this is the most important I think. It speaks to how you win referendums and elections - they are simply not won on philosophising and academic political analysis, despite how beneficial that may be.

I think that the remain and brexit camps were equally as guilty as each other in terms of mistruths and fear mongering because both were aware that campaigns are won on exactly that - that doesn't however mean that they weren't having more fruitful and complex discussions, debates in private and that those arguments didn't exist at all.

Few of the people in the pressure groups / think tanks that I have debated brexit with have ever resorted to "nationalistic sabre rattling" but that is simply because of the setting - if those same people are on the campaign trail then they would likely take that very tact simply because it is effective.

There is so much nuance to a question like EU membership, beyond anything that will ever be properly covered in something like a referendum. If you take that as an unfortunate reality then you have to decide whether it is worth having referendums often devoid of nuance Vs not having them at all and losing that direct democracy.

 

[Gavin]

The last paragraph of this is the most important I think. It speaks to how you win referendums and elections - they are simply not won on philosophising and academic political analysis, despite how beneficial that may be.

I think that the remain and brexit camps were equally as guilty as each other in terms of mistruths and fear mongering because both were aware that campaigns are won on exactly that - that doesn't however mean that they weren't having more fruitful and complex discussions, debates in private and that those arguments didn't exist at all.

Few of the people in the pressure groups / think tanks that I have debated brexit with have ever resorted to "nationalistic sabre rattling" but that is simply because of the setting - if those same people are on the campaign trail then they would likely take that very tact simply because it is effective.

There is so much nuance to a question like EU membership, beyond anything that will ever be properly covered in something like a referendum. If you take that as an unfortunate reality then you have to decide whether it is worth having referendums often devoid of nuance Vs not having them at all and losing that direct democracy.

There is a difference between making prediction based on analysis, such as if the UK doesn't remain in the customs union or single market then there will be a border in Ireland, or flat out lying, such as being forced into an EU army, Turkey joining and the infamous breaking point poster.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

A bit of nice news amongst all this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...s-lorry-drivers-kent-sikh-meals-b1778160.html

A great gesture at any time and it would be great if more of the world bought in to this spirit.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I don't think so, much of Brexit was about sovereignty rather than pure economics so it makes sense that ensuring the former was a core part of the negotiations.

In the short term I do think there will be pain and annoyance with red tape etc and some very minor hardship for seed potato farmers but in the long term we'll be fine, and with good governance (in the next couple decades) will be better off for this.

Just for clarity - I was actively involved in the remain campaign at the time, but a combo of personal negotiator info, Cameron's book and the EUs bad faith negotiation (mutual I know) have soured my opinion of it somewhat

I respectfully don't agree much at all here. Your sovereignty boils down to fishing rights; dropping EU standards, which are more or less equivalent to any developed country bar the US; and becoming a purely common law jurisdiction which will cause more problems than it'll fix. It's not worth much at all forgetting about the cost.

I don't really know if you'll be ok or not economically, haven't given it much thought. The union itself will take a long time to be anywhere near unified though, this could very easily be the end of it. Looking from the outside in there's two regions that would be better outside it than in.

Cameron's book... Really? I wouldn't go near anything written by a man who started all of this **** because he thought he was untouchable following an impossible to lose referendum in Scotland and now needs to salvage some sort of respect for his ego, not worth the paper. I align with Reisser's view re bad faith too.

There's probably reason to be optimistic now that it's happening but I just can't see how you're better out of the EU than in it given your location and history and all of the talk sounds like bluster and nothing more to me.

 

[The Seeker]

Oh, I have just noticed that. Although @Tallshort replied that we never invaded Georgia.
And to add something about invasions during recent times
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Telic
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...t-without-the-iraq-war-there-would-be-no-isis

But only Russians are bad and should be ashamed, of course.

I like the Russian people and consider you a friend, but I don't trust Putin at all. I feel the same way about Trump, but thankfully he'll be replaced in less than a month.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I mean the NI parties would never gonna be happy regardless.
The SNP was never gonna be happy regardless

No deal in the world would've made them happy.


It's a poor deal, but end of the day it was never going to be a better deal than staying in the EU and that was never going happen.
But it's better than going into the new year with no deal.

Unfortutely it is what it is.
just a shame we haven't got a general election next year as I reckon Tories would be booted out pretty well now especially with the covid situation.