The Politics Thread 2019

[Stive Pesley]

44 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

What did you make of the Oldham political rally, where the police marched 2 to 3 hundred Muslim youths, many with their faces covered by balaclavas and scarves, and stood by as rocks and bricks rained down on women and children? 

I think we should stop discussing TR now - as he's a non-entity, but for the record the police have told you to stop with "ill-informed speculation as to what happened"

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/tommy-robinson-violence-oldham-police-16297655

 

But it does have some striking similarities to the Battle Of Cable Street - and we now have proud murals on the streets celebrating that as a victory over fascism. 

 

[eddie]

10 minutes ago, Curtains said:

..

Totally agree, @Curtains

[Curtains]

8 minutes ago, eddie said:

Totally agree, @Curtains

https://beerandpub.com/policies/brexit/

 

Britain’s pubs and brewers are committed to delivering a great customer experience, rewarding careers and fantastic development opportunities. The sector has a unique role in enhancing Britain’s reputation overseas and is well placed to be a driving force for growth as the UK prepares to leave the European Union. For British businesses to thrive in a post-Brexit world we should strive to operate the most competitive tax and regulatory regime in Europe. From a resurgence in British beer exports, to major job creation in pubs and the provision of great hospitality for millions of tourists each year, delivering a highly competitive tax and regulatory environment for beer and pubs will reap major rewards for UK plc.

[eddie]

2 minutes ago, Curtains said:

https://beerandpub.com/policies/brexit/

https://belgiuminabox.com

[Curtains]

5 minutes ago, eddie said:

https://belgiuminabox.com

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1133055/brexit-news-latest-tim-martin-wetherspoons-no-deal-vote-party-today-video-election-uk-eu

[Highgate]

10 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

I would say democracy only works if the losers accept the result. Had remainers fallen in behind the result we could have negotiated a good deal from the off, but because of the continued refusal to accept the referendum we're more likely to end up with no deal.

For most remainers the purpose of a second referendum isn't to ascertain what type of Brexit people want - it's plain and simple a mechanism to try to prevent it happening. In my opinion it's over for democracy if you have another referendum without ever implementing the original result. 

Maybe several of the lead players were saying similar things but I still have the impression that the British electorate had many different versions of Brexit in mind when voting to Leave.  

It does seem strange to me that a country would vote to do something without knowing what that something would turn out to be, and simultaneously insist that they should, under no circumstances, be given an option to change their mind when it finally does become clear what the original choice actually meant.  

I know it makes sense that in democracies losers should accept the results. But even in General Elections the British electorate get to change their mind every 5 years, at the most.  There is no rule for referendums, so how long do they remain valid?  And how wedded should people be to the notion that they must always be enacted upon?  Say for example polls were showing a clear shift in support towards Remains in the wake of the mess that has ensued since the triggering of Article 50, something of the order of 65%-35% Remain,  Would people still insist that in order to protect democracy the clear and obvious wishes of the general population must be ignored? 

 

[maxjam]

23 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

I think we should stop discussing TR now - as he's a non-entity, but for the record the police have told you to stop with "ill-informed speculation as to what happened"

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/tommy-robinson-violence-oldham-police-16297655

But it does have some striking similarities to the Battle Of Cable Street - and we now have proud murals on the streets celebrating that as a victory over fascism.

I've finished with the subject as its not really the time or the place, although there is a discussion to be had about his election campaign if I could be bothered but I can't so there we are!

The police asking us to stop with 'ill-informed speculation' however was imo them covering their backs and to prevent any potential for retaliatory attacks. 

The mob that was led by the police to the Tommy Robinson rally readily posted video of their march through the estates and of themselves terrorising locals on youtube yet their is nothing to show any reciprocation what-so-ever from people attending the rally.  Even the newspapers which love to exaggerate a Tommy Robinson story despite misleading the public with headlines suggesting it was Tommy Robinson causing the trouble couldn't provide any evidence to the contrary which is telling in itself.

[Stive Pesley]

1 minute ago, Highgate said:

I still have the impression that the British electorate had many different versions of Brexit in mind when voting to Leave.

Absolutely - it makes me laugh when people try to argue this point with the same old "Brexit means Brexit" rhetoric. It's the loudest voices in the Leave camp that are now saying that they knew it meant a WTO hard brexit all along - but are they really that confident? Because even if 95% of the Leave voters think that - and 5% swing back to remain. That would still see them lose a second referendum with hard brexit as an option

 

[G STAR RAM]

21 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

I think we should stop discussing TR now - as he's a non-entity, but for the record the police have told you to stop with "ill-informed speculation as to what happened"

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/tommy-robinson-violence-oldham-police-16297655

 

But it does have some striking similarities to the Battle Of Cable Street - and we now have proud murals on the streets celebrating that as a victory over fascism. 

 

Agreed, I won't mention TR again unless he's quoted to me.

Now let's move on to the issue in hand.

What is the ill informed speculation? It's there on video, I've seen it with my own eyes. Rocks and bricks being thrown into a crowd containing families, right under the nose of the police.

It's the police trying to cover things up and water things down that is leading to reaction.

No arrests made is an absolute disgrace. 

Feel free to bury your head in the sand but there are plenty out there that won't. 

[G STAR RAM]

@StivePesley I'm fine with a laughing emoji but this why things are going the way they are.

When asked a simple question, about a issue you feel uncomfortable talking about, the debate closed down.

 

[Curtains]

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/04/rise-and-fall-british-democracy

 

Interesting section 

By the 1960s, however, the chorus of criticism was swelling once more. Tony Benn, soon to emerge as the doyen of the Labour left, railed against the “obsolete philosophy of parliamentary government”, which limited voters to the occasional cross on a ballot paper. It was Benn, more than any other politician, who secured Britain’s first national referendum in 1975, on membership of the European Economic Community. Soon, he predicted, there would be an electronic button in every household, making possible “a new popular democracy” in place of “parliamentary democracy as we know it”.

By the 1980s, Benn was calling for a “national liberation struggle” to tear down “the lace curtains hung by the Mother of Parliaments”. Britain’s parliamentary democracy, he concluded, was “a decorous façade, behind which those who have power exercise it for their own advantage”.

[Van der MoodHoover]

12 minutes ago, Curtains said:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/04/rise-and-fall-british-democracy

 

Interesting section 

By the 1960s, however, the chorus of criticism was swelling once more. Tony Benn, soon to emerge as the doyen of the Labour left, railed against the “obsolete philosophy of parliamentary government”, which limited voters to the occasional cross on a ballot paper. It was Benn, more than any other politician, who secured Britain’s first national referendum in 1975, on membership of the European Economic Community. Soon, he predicted, there would be an electronic button in every household, making possible “a new popular democracy” in place of “parliamentary democracy as we know it”.

 

Well the technology is already there - the "buttons" exists and in some cases you don't even have to push, you just say something to a box.

Sadly, the engagement has not kept pace - most of us prefer to use the technology to confer approval on the next Stavros Flatly or to pick some non-entity celebrity to eat bugs rater than issues that could impact lives - voter disengagement has not been addressed imo.

[Stive Pesley]

14 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

@StivePesley I'm fine with a laughing emoji but this why things are going the way they are.

When asked a simple question, about a issue you feel uncomfortable talking about, the debate closed down.

 

I was laughing at the fact you said you wouldn't mention TR again - and then went on to spout a load more balls about it

I'm happy to fight fascism every day, but it's probably boring for everyone else, so I'm trying not to bite. I know you & Max won't stop sticking up for the tiny pint-sized fascist and his racist followers* so probably best  we leave it there. You picked your side. I picked my side.  I now have a self-imposed moratorium on the  discussion of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and his handful of votes in the EU elections ?

Back to grown-up politics

 

*and if you're going to ask "show me where his followers are being racist" I'd point you at the comments on that Oldham rally video on Youtube for a start. It's a cesspit of the worst kind of ugly racist comments. That's what you align yourself with when you stick up for people who want to create divisions in society

 

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

I was laughing at the fact you said you wouldn't mention TR again - and then went on to spout a load more balls about it

I'm happy to fight fascism every day, but it's probably boring for everyone else, so I'm trying not to bite. I know you & Max won't stop sticking up for the tiny pint-sized fascist and his racist followers* so probably best  we leave it there. You picked your side. I picked my side.  I now have a self-imposed moratorium on the  discussion of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and his handful of votes in the EU elections ?

Back to grown-up politics

 

*and if you're going to ask "show me where his followers are being racist" I'd point you at the comments on that Oldham rally video on Youtube for a start. It's a cesspit of the worst kind of ugly racist comments. That's what you align yourself with when you stick up for people who want to create divisions in society

 

I didn't mention him, I mentioned his political rally. 

You obviously struggle to differentiate between a person and an issue.

Thank you for proving my point.

[GboroRam]

11 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

When Theresa May said "Brexit means Brexit" she was simply confirming that the vote was to leave the EU 

It was to avoid answering a question that still nobody can answer. What does Brexit look like? What is it?

I think the biggest issue is, and I agree entirely that the second referendum is just a ploy to avoid Brexit, a second referendum achieves nothing if it returns another vote in favour of leaving the EU. The success of the Brexit Party says that this issue hasn't gone away - there is still a massive groundswell of support for leave, even though nobody knows what leave looks like.

You say it means leaving the customs union, but that wasn't the discussion that was had 3 years ago. The rhetoric was all based on "the EU won't let us leave, we're too important, they need our money, German car sales will make sure we leave with the best deal possible". Nobody said this would be a no deal situation and to suggest it is not being honest.

Too many details of Brexit are being made up as we go along, and unfortunately when the goalposts change, we still have a lot of people who support it. Support isn't disappearing, it's staying fairly consistent I think. I don't believe another referendum would change the result, at this point.

I think a no deal Brexit is necessary. And I think it will be disastrous. I think we've seen the death of the UK as a major nation. And I know I'll get a few people respond to that, but we'll see.

[WhiteHorseRam]

(It's all going swimmingly well. Over a year since the Novichok attack and they are still at each others throats over the one issue.)

[G STAR RAM]

9 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

It was to avoid answering a question that still nobody can answer. What does Brexit look like? What is it?

I think the biggest issue is, and I agree entirely that the second referendum is just a ploy to avoid Brexit, a second referendum achieves nothing if it returns another vote in favour of leaving the EU. The success of the Brexit Party says that this issue hasn't gone away - there is still a massive groundswell of support for leave, even though nobody knows what leave looks like.

You say it means leaving the customs union, but that wasn't the discussion that was had 3 years ago. The rhetoric was all based on "the EU won't let us leave, we're too important, they need our money, German car sales will make sure we leave with the best deal possible". Nobody said this would be a no deal situation and to suggest it is not being honest.

Too many details of Brexit are being made up as we go along, and unfortunately when the goalposts change, we still have a lot of people who support it. Support isn't disappearing, it's staying fairly consistent I think. I don't believe another referendum would change the result, at this point.

I think a no deal Brexit is necessary. And I think it will be disastrous. I think we've seen the death of the UK as a major nation. And I know I'll get a few people respond to that, but we'll see.

What is your definition of a 'major nation' and what benefits do we derive from that?

From my point of view, this country was on its knees way before the Brexit vote.

[Norman]

36 percent of people who turned up to vote, voted for a No Deal. Nothing else. Just a No Deal.

Taking into account the low turnout in Leave areas, I would say the Leave side knows exactly what it votes for, and exactly what it wants.

[GboroRam]

25 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

What is your definition of a 'major nation' and what benefits do we derive from that?

From my point of view, this country was on its knees way before the Brexit vote.

But the Brexit supporters were telling us that we're the 5th largest economy in the world, so we'll be fine after Brexit.

You're now saying we're already screwed so Brexit can't hurt us any more?

With the importance of the EU to UK goods and services, I think we'll be on for a massive recession if we go no deal, and it will take that in order to put the Brexit debate to bed. The paper press have demonised the EU for so long that people just want away from it without really any understanding of why. That's my opinion.

[Stive Pesley]

2 minutes ago, Norman said:

36 percent of people who turned up to vote, voted for a No Deal. Nothing else. Just a No Deal.

Taking into account the low turnout in Leave areas, I would say the Leave side knows exactly what it votes for, and exactly what it wants.

You're not wrong, but see my earlier post about the fact that even if 95% of those who voted leave in the original referendum were No Deal psychos then that would still not be enough to win a second referendum on an explicit No Deal ticket