A Political Thread

[ncurd]

It's really important for nations to be beholden to a higher authority when it comes human rights. They might make inconvenient decisions buy then so do all courts of law. It's not a damn conspiracy.

Neither was the ever closer union when we joined the EEC it was part of joining campaign and on their litraturr. It was always part of the plan. On referenda also ******** we voted in multiple governments that were happy to further our political entanglement with the EU. Plebiscite's are also flawed the whole point of a repsentative democracy and not a dirext democracy is to elect people who can make these big decisions whilst having the time to actually understand the topic at hand and vote accordingly. Dont think your repsentative is doing that? Replace them with someone who will.

I'm sick to death of the whole grand conspiracy to get us in bed with the EU. It's just a blatant falsehood.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

True.

I just get a bit fed up of other Europeans acting like UK is the outlier in terms of the rise of nationalism, I put a decent chunk of blame to Brexit to the EU who just refused to try and address any issue that was arising at the time being instant it was only the UK that was having issues when these issues have been happening across the continent, and now it's a pretty serious problem for a lot of governments.

More than that, it's a problem with the left. I say this as a lefty but too many on the left just outright dismiss the concerns of those on the right. Yes there are racists and bigots on the right but there are also a lot of people with legitimate concerns based on reason that simply got lumped in with the extremists and had all their views dismissed. As a lefty who is in favour of broad political discourse and debate, I have not been happy with the way the concerns of the right were just shut down for the last few years. What we are seeing now (and since the tea party took over in the USA) is a backlash where the more extreme elements on the right are able to tap into a pent up frustration of the moderates and that frustration was built up because of arrogance of people on the left in assuming we held the moral high ground in all things.

Even now we see all Brexiters being lobbed together as a bunch of foaming and uninformed nationalists and attempts to have a proper debate on the issue are shut down with personal attacks. Obviously the right do this as well but I prefer to hold "my" side to a higher standard. The fact is, things like immigration and issues with multi-culturalism DO exist but any proper debate on it has been shut down. Until people across Europe are prepared to accept that the right wing has legitimate concerns, nationalism and extremism will continue to rise.

 

[McTallshort]

Yes on the rise but I'd say it's worse in the UK given that they voted for Brexit and no right wing nationalists have gained power in the other larger countries such as France where Le Penn was soundly beaten.

What worse than it is Poland, Hungury and Bulgaria?

 

[ncurd]

UKIP won only 1 seat in the election before Brexit.

If anything Nationalism since Brexit has decreased, whereas it's still growing in most other countries. (Just no other countries would allow a Brexit vote).

Its worth noting UKIP are a nationalist party in the sense of the SNP not the racist undertones of the far right. In fact a huge part of their appeal and strength was because they had for the most part a non-racist message led by a leader who was not a foaming at the mouth racist.

Part of their issue post-Brexit and slow takeover from the far right that has been occurring (appointing Tommy Robinson) because having achieved Brexit a lot of their non-racist support has abandoned them in favor of more traditional parties.

Real far-right groups like the EDL and Britain First (are they even a thing anymore?) are still fringe groups for most of British society and are usually splintering groups all the time. We don't really have a mainstream far-right party with any real support here.

Thats not to say there isn't casual racism in the UK and we don't have strong nationalist/authoritarian streak within us. But if you look back at the 80's we are still a lot better than we once were.


Yes the UK has lurched to right this decade but I honestly I think if anything the referendum has stopped us going massively down that rabbit hole, In fact for many people its made them stop and take note of what is going on. Mainly because its become obvious the people who Brexit don't have a plan and the land milk and honey has been exposed for the lie it always was.

 

[General Melchett]

What worse than it is Poland, Hungury and Bulgaria?

There are issues in those countries for sure but governments come and go. Letting the people decide on EU membership is on another level IMHO and we are on our own in that respect.

 

[McTallshort]

There are issues in those countries for sure but governments come and go. Letting the people decide on EU membership is on another level IMHO and we are on our own in that respect.

The Hungarian and Polish governments are not going anywhere and the only reason other countries wont let their people decide is because most countries know their people will also vote to leave.

Don't forget the EU as it stands was only because the Lisbon Treaty was signed and the only reason the that was signed was because the EU tried to push though a new constitution which required a public vote. Both the Dutch and French public voted against this new constitution so the EU came up with the Lisbon treaty which because it was a treaty didn't require a public vote in almost all countries apart from Ireland (who initially voted to reject it but were told to vote again).

Eastern European countries are kicking back at the EU on many things not least the fact that their best and brightest people are all leaving to work for higher wages in the west. Also they were all unhappy about the way Germany handled the Refugee crisis. Make no mistake the Counties in Eastern Europe are very concerned about Islam what they believe is its spread. Last time I was in Poland my mother in law told me to shave my beard off "just in case".

Xenophobia in most parts of the Britain is very low compared to nearly all parts of Eastern Europe and many parts of Western Europe. Just because we voted to leave a trading block doesn't automatically make us the leaders of some great Nationalistic push.

 

[General Melchett]

Xenophobia in most parts of the Britain is very low compared to nearly all parts of Eastern Europe and many parts of Western Europe. Just because we voted to leave a trading block doesn't automatically make us the leaders of some great Nationalistic push.

Agree it's worse in certain eastern European countries but the leave vote had very little to do with economics or leaving the trading block and more to do with a protest vote against the establishment and ending free movement/immigration. The other countries' Governments weren't as stupid as David Cameron who made a monumental misjudgement.

 

[McTallshort]

Agree it's worse in certain eastern European countries but the leave vote had very little to do with economics or leaving the trading block and more to do with a protest vote against the establishment and ending free movement/immigration. The other countries' Governments weren't as stupid as David Cameron who made a monumental misjudgement.

So what does that say about the EU?

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Ireland (who initially voted to reject it but were told to vote again).

Just on the Lisbon treaty referendum here which I often see being brought up so as to show the EU as some overbearing authoritive institution. (I don't know if that's your point here or not, it's just a pet peeve of mine) Its not accurate if thats the point, the campaign for the first referendum was an absolute mess. The No campaign was run based on lies such as there would be conscription to an EU army if it was passed as well as Ireland having to give up our Constitution. The yes campaign hadn't prepared itself to rebut these lies and came across as incompetent as a result, the second referendum passed with a 70% majority with 2 of 40 constituencies voting against it. The exact same had happened with the Nice treaty, it's a testament to the naivity and incompetence of the Fianna Fail government more than any slight against the EU.

As for the another part of that post, do you think leaving the EU will stop emmigration of skilled workers? If the UK leave the EEA and EFTA they're set to experience an 8% drop in GDP, the knock on effect of it is a 2-4% drop in Ireland when we'll stay completely in the EU. If an Eastern European country with a smaller economy than the UK (so any eastern European country) decides to vote to leave the EU they would lose more skilled workers to emmigration while retaining more unskilled workers and you'd soon have a massive problem with unemployment and a country which would be as unappealing as possible to anyone wanting to work in a tertiary sector job.

Campaigning against the EU is easy because no one knows how it works, nor are they interested in educating themselves, and it's easy to come up with arguments such as "the EU's free movement of people results in us losing our skilled workers" when in reality there is no correlation between the two.

 

[ncurd]

the first referendum was an absolute mess. The No campaign was run based on lies such as there would be conscription to an EU army if it was passed as well as Ireland having to give up our Constitution. The yes campaign hadn't prepared itself to rebut these lies and came across as incompetent as a result,

That sounds awfully familiar...

 

[McTallshort]

Just on the Lisbon treaty referendum here which I often see being brought up so as to show the EU as some overbearing authoritive institution. (I don't know if that's your point here or not, it's just a pet peeve of mine) Its not accurate if thats the point, the campaign for the first referendum was an absolute mess. The No campaign was run based on lies such as there would be conscription to an EU army if it was passed as well as Ireland having to give up our Constitution. The yes campaign hadn't prepared itself to rebut these lies and came across as incompetent as a result, the second referendum passed with a 70% majority with 2 of 40 constituencies voting against it. The exact same had happened with the Nice treaty, it's a testament to the naivity and incompetence of the Fianna Fail government more than any slight against the EU.

As for the another part of that post, do you think leaving the EU will stop emmigration of skilled workers? If the UK leave the EEA and EFTA they're set to experience an 8% drop in GDP, the knock on effect of it is a 2-4% drop in Ireland when we'll stay completely in the EU. If an Eastern European country with a smaller economy than the UK (so any eastern European country) decides to vote to leave the EU they would lose more skilled workers to emmigration while retaining more unskilled workers and you'd soon have a massive problem with unemployment and a country which would be as unappealing as possible to anyone wanting to work in a tertiary sector job.

Campaigning against the EU is easy because no one knows how it works, nor are they interested in educating themselves, and it's easy to come up with arguments such as "the EU's free movement of people results in us losing our skilled workers" when in reality there is no correlation between the two.

on your first bit I was just demonstrating that because the EU constitution was rejected in Holland and France they decided not to try it anywhere else and use a treaty instead which only required Ireland to vote on. Which does show it as an overbearing authoritative institution because when they got the results from Holland and France they simply circumvented it and changed the name.

The problem Eastern European countries face is that they are investing significantly in its young people (Uni is free in Poland) only to see those people move to the UK and work in Amazon as a picker. This is great for Amazon and business leaders in Western Europe but not much good for Poland. Its skilled workforce is being used as unskilled labour for the benefit of Western businesses. Don't forget the primary reason of the EU is to help and protect big business and trade, that's why traditional socialists like Corbyn are opposed to it.

 

[McTallshort]

That sounds awfully familiar...

Except there has been anti EU retoric for years in the UK and no body ever thought to challange it. Fishing rights, pounds and ounces, human rights, the Euro all these things were alive and being splashed over tabloids before anyone mentioned free movement of people and the pro european's frankly ignored it. People like Farage were dismissed as far right or swivel eye loons but people were listerning to him and voices against the EU were just as strong in the 90s as they are now probably more so.

The Brexit vote was decided years before 2016 the remain campaign had 20 years to catch up once the referendam was called.

 

[ncurd]

Except there has been anti EU retoric for years in the UK and no body ever thought to challange it. Fishing rights, pounds and ounces, human rights, the Euro all these things were alive and being splashed over tabloids before anyone mentioned free movement of people and the pro european's frankly ignored it. People like Farage were dismissed as far right or swivel eye loons but people were listerning to him and voices against the EU were just as strong in the 90s as they are now probably more so.

The Brexit vote was decided years before 2016 the remain campaign had 20 years to catch up once the referendam was called.

Yes but until 2004 and Tony Blair's decision not to limit migration from the new member states those were all fringe opinions hell they were still 6 years on. UKIP in 2005 managed 2.2% of the vote, the Tories were still being destroyed by Labour and the pro-European Lib Dems held a significant amount of seats and looked to be growing (they actually shrunk in later elections which is why you can point to those years as turning point). 5 years later in 2010 there was still no significant appetite and UKIP had only turned 1% of voters to get to 3%. However in 5 short years after that it sprung to 12.6% of voters.

Really we have to ask what happened between 2010 and 2017 to build anti-EU sentiment so high. The economic crash of 2008 was partly to blame but the lack of culpability also created a massive anti-establishment viewpoint. With the EU seen as our center of commerce it was very easy to blame them rather than take our politicians into account. The goverment (and Osbourne and Cameron have admitted to this) weaponised the EU so every problem was ultimately their fault. Tabloids cut and run with it telling many many lies and half truths, inflating the signal of stories that were anti-EU. Human Rights are a good example here the message from politicians should be 'yes we'd like to get rid of these people, but we have to keep them because we fundamentally believe in peoples rights as we are British, we have to show we are better than them' or something along those lines. Instead we got 'boo hoo the evil EU won't let us do what we want even though we'd want our own citizens to be treated humanely if the shoe was on the other foot'.

Going back to econmoics there was a huge swathe of just anti-establishment voting to sock it the Elites (despite the campaign to leave being led the very privilege).

Long story there are a huge amount of factors into why the referendum ended the way it did and pinning it down to the minority of leave voters who voted on racial grounds is a big mistake and by minority I mean less than 50% of leave voters, getting an actual figure would just be laughable. As I said earlier it highlights the importance of representative over direct democracy. The question was too simplistic and nobody is entirely sure except the most rabid of leave supporters what they actually wanted. I've now had family members who voted leave quite vhemently say 'they never thought it would be this bad' despite in the campaign never really articulating what they wanted. Straight after the vote they told me 'it'll be better you'll see' and to be quite honest what has happened so far was the best case scenario....

The reality not even Nigel Farage expected an leave win the referendum, whilst the casual dismissal of concerns was a grave error the actual reality is the government had used the EU as a scape goat for so long it was really hard to back peddle from that place. How do we promote the thing we've been dismissing for so long?




PS The Imperial System needs to rot in hell, its just terrible by any useful measure other than nostalgia.

 

[McTallshort]

Yes but until 2004 and Tony Blair's decision not to limit migration from the new member states those were all fringe opinions hell they were still 6 years on. UKIP in 2005 managed 2.2% of the vote, the Tories were still being destroyed by Labour and the pro-European Lib Dems held a significant amount of seats and looked to be growing (they actually shrunk in later elections which is why you can point to those years as turning point). 5 years later in 2010 there was still no significant appetite and UKIP had only turned 1% of voters to get to 3%. However in 5 short years after that it sprung to 12.6% of voters.

Really we have to ask what happened between 2010 and 2017 to build anti-EU sentiment so high. The economic crash of 2008 was partly to blame but the lack of culpability also created a massive anti-establishment viewpoint. With the EU seen as our center of commerce it was very easy to blame them rather than take our politicians into account. The goverment (and Osbourne and Cameron have admitted to this) weaponised the EU so every problem was ultimately their fault. Tabloids cut and run with it telling many many lies and half truths, inflating the signal of stories that were anti-EU. Human Rights are a good example here the message from politicians should be 'yes we'd like to get rid of these people, but we have to keep them because we fundamentally believe in peoples rights as we are British, we have to show we are better than them' or something along those lines. Instead we got 'boo hoo the evil EU won't let us do what we want even though we'd want our own citizens to be treated humanely if the shoe was on the other foot'.

Going back to econmoics there was a huge swathe of just anti-establishment voting to sock it the Elites (despite the campaign to leave being led the very privilege).

Long story there are a huge amount of factors into why the referendum ended the way it did and pinning it down to the minority of leave voters who voted on racial grounds is a big mistake and by minority I mean less than 50% of leave voters, getting an actual figure would just be laughable. As I said earlier it highlights the importance of representative over direct democracy. The question was too simplistic and nobody is entirely sure except the most rabid of leave supporters what they actually wanted. I've now had family members who voted leave quite vhemently say 'they never thought it would be this bad' despite in the campaign never really articulating what they wanted. Straight after the vote they told me 'it'll be better you'll see' and to be quite honest what has happened so far was the best case scenario....

The reality not even Nigel Farage expected an leave win the referendum, whilst the casual dismissal of concerns was a grave error the actual reality is the government had used the EU as a scape goat for so long it was really hard to back peddle from that place. How do we promote the thing we've been dismissing for so long?




PS The Imperial System needs to rot in hell, its just terrible by any useful measure other than nostalgia.

UKIP were getting at least 20% in the European elections nearly beating the Tories in 2004 with 26%. People voted for them in Europe because they saw them as a European party that would cause trouble for the EU which is what many people in traditional labour voting areas wanted but those same people didn't take them seriously as a National party until much later. Dont forget also the late 90s and early 00s saw a raise in the BNP and EDL and much of this was down to anti EU sentiment I lived somewhere at the time that had 3 BNP candidates stand in a local council election. All three were ex miners and apart from asylum seekers their biggest gripe was Brussels letting terrorists stay in Britain because of EU human rights laws. People believed this and it amazed me that the other candidates did nothing to promote the EU.

The rot had set in long before Cameroon got near number 10, maybe not so much everywhere but there was certainly plenty of it in the area of Nottinghamshire I was living in.

Oh and your right about the imperial system.

 

[ncurd]

The problem with European elections is nobody was entirely sure how much of a useful barmoeter they were, turnout was always incredibly low 2004 turnout was 38.5% as opposed to the general election a year later at 61.4%. UKIP also lost 2 million votes(going from a 15.6% vote share to 2.2%, although with same turnout as European elections 3.7%) in that timeframe. The Lib Dems were only minor party sustaining those gains through to general votes. As noted UKIP never really broke through as a major party in terms of general elections. Its quite easy with those fluctuations to see it as a protest vote (and lets be honest we've never taken European elections seriously and is a whole over can of worms).

It'll take a long time for political scholars to unpick this one.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I'm just staggered that so many British nationalists who voted for Brexit cannot see the huge parallels between what happened in that referendum and what happened in the Scottish referendum. I've spoken to people who voted for Brexit who were dismissive when it was the SNP making identical arguments.

Both accused the larger body of trampling over the wishes of the people
Both accused the status-quo supporters of "project fear"
Both claimed they were running a positive campaign in favour of national identity and not one built largely upon dislike/fear/hatred of the other party
Both used the larger body as a scapegoat for all the problems whilst accepting none of the blame already lay with them
Both claimed the larger body was stifling them and preventing proper relations with the rest of the world
Both claimed the larger body was a detached bunch of bureaucrats operating for the select few
Both claimed that they could magically fix all their problems if only they had more power
Both claimed they got unfair treatment whilst having the most opt outs and exceptions of any party
Both said they gave away lots of money to the larger party and suggested what they could do if they kept that money themselves
Both completely ignored the benefit of being in a union
Both claimed greater difficulty of trading with the biggest trading partner would be offset by increased global trade
Both claimed they would try to negotiate a better deal, got it but then shifted the goalposts so no deal would ever be good enough.

And most tellingly, both tore the countries in half and created a lot of bad blood between the smaller party and the larger one. All that and more and yet you get Brexiters who criticised the Scots for their tactics and then went on to use exactly the same arguments and same tactics in the EU referendum.

 

[General Melchett]

I'm just staggered that so many British nationalists who voted for Brexit cannot see the huge parallels between what happened in that referendum and what happened in the Scottish referendum. I've spoken to people who voted for Brexit who were dismissive when it was the SNP making identical arguments.

Both accused the larger body of trampling over the wishes of the people
Both accused the status-quo supporters of "project fear"
Both claimed they were running a positive campaign in favour of national identity and not one built largely upon dislike/fear/hatred of the other party
Both used the larger body as a scapegoat for all the problems whilst accepting none of the blame already lay with them
Both claimed the larger body was stifling them and preventing proper relations with the rest of the world
Both claimed the larger body was a detached bunch of bureaucrats operating for the select few
Both claimed that they could magically fix all their problems if only they had more power
Both claimed they got unfair treatment whilst having the most opt outs and exceptions of any party
Both said they gave away lots of money to the larger party and suggested what they could do if they kept that money themselves
Both completely ignored the benefit of being in a union
Both claimed greater difficulty of trading with the biggest trading partner would be offset by increased global trade
Both claimed they would try to negotiate a better deal, got it but then shifted the goalposts so no deal would ever be good enough.

And most tellingly, both tore the countries in half and created a lot of bad blood between the smaller party and the larger one. All that and more and yet you get Brexiters who criticised the Scots for their tactics and then went on to use exactly the same arguments and same tactics in the EU referendum.

Good summary. It's not dissimilar to siege mentality tactics.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Article 13 is a interesting thing.
Musicians are loving it, but I think they seem to think they will make bank from it which I don't get but whatever.

It's going to affect my Gif posting though, which will make everyone on here upset.

 

[McTallshort]

I'm just staggered that so many British nationalists who voted for Brexit cannot see the huge parallels between what happened in that referendum and what happened in the Scottish referendum. I've spoken to people who voted for Brexit who were dismissive when it was the SNP making identical arguments.

Both accused the larger body of trampling over the wishes of the people
Both accused the status-quo supporters of "project fear"
Both claimed they were running a positive campaign in favour of national identity and not one built largely upon dislike/fear/hatred of the other party
Both used the larger body as a scapegoat for all the problems whilst accepting none of the blame already lay with them
Both claimed the larger body was stifling them and preventing proper relations with the rest of the world
Both claimed the larger body was a detached bunch of bureaucrats operating for the select few
Both claimed that they could magically fix all their problems if only they had more power
Both claimed they got unfair treatment whilst having the most opt outs and exceptions of any party
Both said they gave away lots of money to the larger party and suggested what they could do if they kept that money themselves
Both completely ignored the benefit of being in a union
Both claimed greater difficulty of trading with the biggest trading partner would be offset by increased global trade
Both claimed they would try to negotiate a better deal, got it but then shifted the goalposts so no deal would ever be good enough.

And most tellingly, both tore the countries in half and created a lot of bad blood between the smaller party and the larger one. All that and more and yet you get Brexiters who criticised the Scots for their tactics and then went on to use exactly the same arguments and same tactics in the EU referendum.

Such as who?

 

[Reiser99]

Such as who?

TBH I don't think it was criticising he Scots, more that they argued against those reasons for Scotland leaving, but use the same arguments for leaving the E.U, which is very hypocritical and shows they only care about what benefits them, rather than the sovereignty argument they keep going on about it. We should have sovereignty but you can't.