The Politics Thread 2019

[1of4]

18 minutes ago, Archied said:

Why is another referdum suddenly going to carry any more weight or be adhered to more than the first one?

Hopefully the next time there a democratically run referendum. The people setting it are capable of putting down options on the ballot paper that have defined outcomes. Unlike the previous referendum where one of the options available to vote for, did not, as the last three years of turmoil as shown.

[eddie]

A referendum should only really be used when its sole purpose is to ratify a proposed course of action over which the authority has the capability of enacting both alternatives. "Leave" was never a course of action because the actual leave process was not defined - it was an end target where none of the steps leading up to the desired action existed, were laid out or were controllable.

There have been so many interpretations from so many people as to what their personal definition of 'leave' meant - a whole spectrum ranging from engaging with the EU as closely as possible (e.g. an arrangement similar to what Norway has with the EU) right the way through to walking away, welching on debts and telling the EU to sod off. Conversations I have had with people I have a close relationship with have a tendency to be unproductive, especially when the "Leave means leave" mantra is chanted, because of a tendency for the personal interpretation to then be projected to all the other people who voted to exit the EU. "We all voted for XYZ". No, YOU voted for XYZ. Others may have voted for another sequence of letters.

I've actually given up trying to get people to understand the simple fact that their interpretation is just one of a numer of different alternatives, all of which fit the question on the referendum, and all of which mean "Leave". Paul Simon's song could easily have been titled "50 Ways To Leave The EU".

 

 

[1of4]

35 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

EU federalists...

You've lost me there. Are you saying everyone who voted remain are EU federalists or were you referring to the less than 1/5th  figure you previously stated. I'm not sure what your point is as you don't appear to be giving them in complete sentences.

 

 

[Parsnip]

45 minutes ago, eddie said:

Paul Simon's song could easily have been titled "50 Ways To Leave The EU".

Just realised how gutted I'd be if the leave campaign hooked on to that song!

 

[GboroRam]

40 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Hopefully the next time there a democratically run referendum. The people setting it are capable of putting down options on the ballot paper that have defined outcomes. Unlike the previous referendum where one of the options available to vote for, did not, as the last three years of turmoil as shown.

And how many votes do we give the Russians this time? ?

 

[Uptherams]

8 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

You've lost me there. Are you saying everyone who voted remain are EU federalists or were you referring to the less than 1/5th  figure you previously stated. I'm not sure what your point is as you don't appear to be giving them in complete sentences.

 

 

Very few people in the UK are EU federalists. About the same amount as voted for UKIP when Cameron was PM. So when the argument for remaining rears it's head, very few are not only aware of the medium to long term implications and very few want to be part of that. Funnily enough the most ardent and vocal supporters and defenders of the EU are federalists. Those that are on this forum should just cut out the guff and state to everyone else that they actually are and not simply just remainers. 

[sheeponacid]

2 hours ago, 1of4 said:

Have I missed a vote somewhere?  Didn't 49% vote to remain part of it.

Yes I think you must of missed a vote, as 48.1% voted remain...even if your rounding it up, its still much much closer to 48% by my maths.

You make claims of untruths, but then you put an untruth, to support your own agenda...pure quality.

But as Gritters put earlier, it's every man for him self nowadays...so why don't we just stretch it to 49.99999% to add further weight to your agenda.

[eddie]

51 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

You've lost me there. Are you saying everyone who voted remain are EU federalists or were you referring to the less than 1/5th  figure you previously stated. I'm not sure what your point is as you don't appear to be giving them in complete sentences.

 

 

Whilst we see football in black and white, there are other areas of life which have shades of grey, but some people are incapable - or unwilling - to acknowledge that fact. It's why "Leave means leave" could only ever be a meaningless truism - a soundbite for the goldfish and one which ignored all complexity - simply because in order to leave, you have to determine exactly how you leave.

[Rev]

3 hours ago, McRamFan said:

 

Thanks for posting that, as I don't use any other forms of social media it's the sort of article I'd be in danger of missing.

I thought there was a slight contradiction in the article, blaming the Brexit decision for Nissan and Honda not investing in the UK, but praising the EU/Japan trade deal, which is possibly just as much behind those decisions, after all the Japanese no longer need a European manufacturing base to avoid EU tariffs, why send jobs abroad if you don't have too?

That aside, I'd say it's a fair enough opinion piece that reflects my own position in some ways.

I voted Leave, I'd reverse that decision if the Referendum were to be held next week.

 

[ariotofmyown]

59 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

Funnily enough the most ardent and vocal supporters and defenders of the EU are federalists. Those that are on this forum should just cut out the guff and state to everyone else that they actually are and not simply just remainers. 

Finally, someone lays down the challenge to the secret dcfc fans federalist clique. Will they out themselves this time, or continue to hide under their belgian waffles and pretend to be simply remainers?

[1of4]

5 minutes ago, sheeponacid said:

Yes I think you must of missed a vote, as 48.1% voted remain...even if your rounding it up, its still much much closer to 48% by my maths.

You make claims of untruths, but then you put an untruth, to support your own agenda...pure quality.

But as Gritters put earlier, it's every man for him self nowadays...so why don't we just stretch it to 49.99999% to add further weight to your agenda.

49% still a lot nearer to 48.1% than the figure of less than 1/5th that I was referring to.  I made a genuine mistake over the amount of remain voters, unlike the blatant lies perpetuated by many leave campaigners. But if you need to call it a lie to justify you own stance, thats ok I can live with it.

 

[eddie]

8 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

49% still a lot nearer to 48.1% than the figure of less than 1/5th that I was referring to.  I made a genuine mistake over the amount of remain voters, unlike the blatant lies perpetuated by many leave campaigners. But if you need to call it a lie to justify you own stance, thats ok I can live with it.

 

When the Gammonball Run held that rally in Notts a couple of weeks ago, Farage surveyed the crowd of 200 and claimed that there were 17.4 million in attendance. I'm only surprised that he didn't claim 350 million.

[cstand]

On the ballot paper it said  leave or remain not leave in 50 ways that's just stupid.  It's a remain parliament that have ruined the Brexit process and if leaving with no deal was so bad the E.U. would have kick us out by now and made an example of us. Must 9 billion reasons why they have not. 

[Comrade 86]

On 06/04/2019 at 21:57, JoetheRam said:

I agree Leave was not a binary choice, but was remain not part of a spectrum as well? Are people who want to remain, happy to remain in the EU indefinitely whatever rules/ideas/plans they have for us? Are they just happy to remain with the situation in Europe as it currently is? Is there anything that could happen to pursuade them not to want to be part of the EU in the future, or is their identity so far ingrained as "Europe first" that they'd vote remain in all situations?

A good and fair question that seldom gets asked midst the mud-slinging.

Remain was and is definitely not a 'binary choice' as you put it. Many on here assume that remoaners like myself are some sort of Europhiles, blindly kneeling at the EU altar but this is a long walk from the truth, for many of us, at least.

The spectrum you alluded to ranges from those who blindly support Brussels over Westminster to folk like me who find disaster capitalists like Rees Mogg and Johnson a far less comfortable alternative to the costly meddling of Juncker and co. The former have been shorting U.K. Equities and Sterling for 3 years already. The greater the disaster they create, the cheaper the stock and currency is to buy. They will of course make huge fortunes when the markets eventually recover. They will also evade any EU legislation that might interfere with their offshore 'investments'. Those who believe they have wider and more altruistic notions are kidding themselves. These people are ducking vampires and they make the more grasping of the EU Eurocrats seem like choirboys by comparison. Be assured, they care not one iota for their common man, they give not tuppeny **** for notions of sovereignty and they know full well that net immigration will ruse post-Brexit. Put simply, these men are to be feared. Given the chance, and they have that chance right now, the will tear down brick by brick what our tax dollars have built and paid for, and as British citizens die through lack of free and available healthcare (for instance) they'll go home of an evening, fill their bellies and get a find night's sleep. Cheats do prosper and karma is ********, let's not kid ourselves otherwise. 

For me, this single argument (I could give many more) is in itself a good enough reason to vote remain without my even having to consider the utterly shambolic clusterfuck that was always going to be the Tory 'plan' for post-Brexit Britain. Sometimes, and I believe this is one such time, the devil you know really is the best option. 

Lastly, whilst a long walk from anything close to perfect, many of the principles behind a united Europe and a single market make sense. As a screaming libtard, human and workers rights immediately spring to mind even before we consider the obvious economic benefits to be garnered from a more streamlined EU. 

Unfortunately, like many good ideas, the few have ended up benefitting at the cost of too many. My stance despite these imperfections, is that we can't effect change from outside of the machine. Nor can we take for granted that we can negotiate fair terms as a standalone entity. We are not the global  power we once were and given the ineptitude of the Brexit negotiators, how can we trust the same people who've failed so miserably in that regard, to secure and protect our interests in any other deals they seek to strike? The fact is, we can't and that single fact should be obvious to all and sundry by now irrespective of one's views on the EU. 

[Stive Pesley]

On 07/04/2019 at 08:49, maxjam said:

Tommy Robinson is a direct result of mass (muslim in this case) immigration and people having genuine concerns about their communities - but being told they are racist if they want to talk about them.

Brexit is a direct result of ordinary working class people feeling as though they are being left behind and having their concerns ignored by the ruling elite.

The bold bit I agree with 100%.

The bit about Tommy Robinson I don't think is phrased very well. He is a man who has seen an opportunity to monetise people's concerns and exploit their fears. If he was actually interested in anything other than getting those people to donate money to him - he'd actually be trying to do something constructive about the situation, rather than just stoking the flames. He's a grifter who has got himself rich. Lives in a £500k house which those people's fears have paid for.

I'd hope that most sensible folk can see the difference between people having genuine concerns about their communities and scumbags like him exploiting those concerns for profit

[maxjam]

41 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

The bit about Tommy Robinson I don't think is phrased very well. He is a man who has seen an opportunity to monetise people's concerns and exploit their fears. If he was actually interested in anything other than getting those people to donate money to him - he'd actually be trying to do something constructive about the situation, rather than just stoking the flames. He's a grifter who has got himself rich. Lives in a £500k house which those people's fears have paid for.

I'd hope that most sensible folk can see the difference between people having genuine concerns about their communities and scumbags like him exploiting those concerns for profit

You don't have to agree with what Tommy Robinson says or does but in my opinion he is a direct result of a two tier system with regards to Islam. 

Ordinary people are frightened to speak up and voice concerns fearing being labelled a racist, having their social media deleted or losing their jobs etc.  A recent example of this is the Parkfield School LGBT saga - any other demographic would have been splashed all over the media, called out as homophobic/transphobic etc but this story has remained relatively low key (despite the fact its growing - I think there are now 4 schools that have dropped LGBT lessons because you 'can't be muslim and gay')

When ordinary people are to scared to speak out who will?  Step forwards Tommy Robinson.  He may enjoy a bit of self promotion but he's not afraid to sail close to the wind to speak up for what he believes in - and people will follow him because he highlights issues they want raised.  His facebook page (before it got deleted) had more followers than all the major political parties combined.  I don't believe every one of them was a far-right Islam hating scumbag.

Censoring people never works, it only drives them and their movement underground further radicalizing them.  What has happened to various people on social media, including Tommy Robinson is hugely worrying - especially when a lot of it in Robinsons case is outright lies and misinformation.  I always think back to the IRA, we stopped them blowing people up by talking to them.  If we can do that with callous murders of innocents I'm sure we could talk to less extreme individuals and groups.

[Stive Pesley]

43 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I always think back to the IRA, we stopped them blowing people up by talking to them.  If we can do that with callous murders of innocents I'm sure we could talk to less extreme individuals and groups.

My point is that Yaxley-Lennon has no interest in dialog or resolving things. He's just a grifter making money by stoking people's fears. It's incredibly naive to see it otherwise. He's also very good at playing the victim card to his advantage. Being banned by the likes of Facebook is indeed counter-productive, but only because it gives him something else to get his followers riled up about (ker-ching!)

 

 

[maxjam]

16 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

My point is that Yaxley-Lennon has no interest in dialog or resolving things. He's just a grifter making money by stoking people's fears. It's incredibly naive to see it otherwise.

I've done a fair bit of research into Tommy Robinson and I think thats a bit unfair tbh, there is more to him than is spoken about in the media.  I'd challenge you to do your own research into him but anyone dismissively calling him Yaxley-Lennon has already had their mind made up for them by the media.

I'd agree that he is full of bluster and rough around the edges and thats exactly why I would give him a platform and speak to him.  You can't disarm him or his followers if you ignore or silence them, you address concerns and show people for what they are by engaging with them in public.  Otherwise you add to their notoriety and reinforce their beliefs.

* FYI I am not a Tommy fan I just always do my own research.

[Stive Pesley]

38 minutes ago, maxjam said:

* FYI I am not a Tommy fan

Yeah - doesn't sound like it ?

Reminds me why i didn't miss the politics threads. In the interests of not getting banned, I'lll have to stop myself debating any furher

[maxjam]

2 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

Yeah - doesn't sound like it ?

Reminds me why i didn't miss the politics threads. In the interests of not getting banned, I'lll have to stop myself debating any furher

I repeat, the tories didn't have to like the IRA to talk to them and I'm more than capable of juggling multiple viewpoints.

But yeah, probably a good time to end, it is the politics/brexit thread anyway.