Brexit Referendum Superthread

Memnoch

djpbarry wrote: »

Sure - it's easier than ever for people to disengage their brains.

But that's still not an excuse. I mean, the very fact that statements such as "fake news" and "alternative facts" exist suggest that such things are easily detectable, doesn't it? It really doesn't take more than about 10 seconds of searching to demonstrate that "fake" news is very obviously fake.

It's not that easy when you don't have a high level of education and have been bombarded by rhethoric that plays to your fears from a very young age.

Especially fear of the 'other' which is tied in at a very deep level of the human psyche.

Also not all media manipulation is a case of simple direct lies. It's more about building a coherent narrative.

Take 'The Guardian,' for instance. I don't think you can call any of their articles FAKE NEWS. But just last week they ran an article by Tony Blair about how Corbyn was doomed. Then the next day another article about how Blair wouldn't support Corbyn. And so on. Three articles by Blair on virtually the same topic in a week. These were hosted up on the main page online.

By simply being carefully selective about which stories to give prominence and which to downplay or ignore, which voices to give a platform to, which statistics to publish or ignore, a mediia outlet can craft a very strong narrative which can influence even astute and educated readers who trust that outlet.

This is how, for example, the Guardian and papers like it have managed to convince a lot of people that somehow Corbyn should be blamed for brexit.

Simply because he didn't put in every ounce of his soul into campaigning for something that fundamentally he did not whole heartedly believe in, and in which, he probably reflected the view of the majority of the British public in being a 'skeptical/borderline remainer.'

We've had posters on here raging about brexit and saying that voting for MAY is a good choice if you were a strong supporter of remaining in the EU.

I'm not going to even begin to list all of the reasons why the blame should fall squarely and heavily on the shoulders of the Conservative party collectively and May's own role in that along with that of her foreign Sec Boris Johnson.

But the above narrative of how Corbyn is somehow responsible for Brexit is a great example of the manipulative power of the media even when it is acting subtly.

AnGaelach

Rightwing wrote: »

Yes indeed, most underestimated Farage, he ran a great campaign. Johnson was a fraud. We, as EU citizens also need to look at why M LePen is doing do well in France, running at 40% or so. There's something wrong.

Well, you've already been told the reasons why. Immigration, constant encroachment of the EU, the globalisation of economies.

You're just choosing not to listen to the problems.

AnGaelach

djpbarry wrote: »

People always want someone to blame when they're under the impression that they're being hard done by. Immigrants are always an easy target.

Probably because immigration is why those people feel hard-done by. It's not the highly educated who have to compete with mass migration, it's the working class. Of course they're going to blame immigration for their position, it is a major contributing factor. Closing your eyes to the issue doesn't mean it isn't an issue.

Jim2007

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Anyone know what that eurocrat was on about? He insisted on speaking French.

Once the U.K. leaves there will be no obligation on the EU to provide documentation or services in English as it is not the preferred language of any member state.

Water John

Think it is of Malta.

First Up

Jim2007 wrote:

Once the U.K. leaves there will be no obligation on the EU to provide documentation or services in English as it is not the preferred language of any member state.

What language do we prefer?

prinzeugen

Jim2007 wrote: »

Once the U.K. leaves there will be no obligation on the EU to provide documentation or services in English as it is not the preferred language of any member state.

Eh.. What are you typing in now? In a EU state?

mickoneill31

First Up wrote: »

What language do we prefer?

prinzeugen wrote: »

Eh.. What are you typing in now? In a EU state?

In our wisdom Ireland has Irish as our official language in the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_the_European_Union

With the UK going nobody has English as their official language.

It's not going to disappear but it's a lot less important now. Much like the UK

Harry Palmr

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Anyone know what that eurocrat was on about? He insisted on speaking French.

swampgas wrote: »

Better than Irish anyway :pac:

Jim2007 wrote: »

Once the U.K. leaves there will be no obligation on the EU to provide documentation or services in English as it is not the preferred language of any member state.

Water John wrote: »

Think it is of Malta.

First Up wrote: »

What language do we prefer?

prinzeugen wrote: »

Eh.. What are you typing in now? In a EU state?

mickoneill31 wrote: »

In our wisdom Ireland has Irish as our official language in the EU.
With the UK going nobody has English as their official language.

I bet that quip was made without Monsieur even thinking of Ireland or Malta.

With the UK leaving eventually the squeeze on Ireland is going to be considerable in one respect while we're going to be increasingly overlooked in other matters. A return to a Francophone EU is nothing to look forward to.

Water John

It is an official language of Ireland and Malta.

Simply, Juncker and Barnier paying, bad cop good cop.

AnGaelach

I'd prefer if we had to do everything through Irish, if we're being completely honest.

Water John

In that case, a lot of fellas would never get, the shift.

ancapailldorcha

Water John wrote: »

In that case, a lot of fellas would never get, the shift.

Cut the nonsense please.

Sam Russell

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I bet that quip was made without Monsieur even thinking of Ireland or Malta.

With the UK leaving eventually the squeeze on Ireland is going to be considerable in one respect while we're going to be increasingly overlooked in other matters. A return to a Francophone EU is nothing to look forward to.

No country east of the Maginot line will want French as the main language of the EU. English is the first or second language of the vast majority of the 27 EU members.

First Up

mickoneill31 wrote:

In our wisdom Ireland has Irish as our official language in the EU.

Every country's language is an "official" language. The working (or "procedural") languages are currently English, French and German.

Fratton Fred

mickoneill31 wrote: »

In our wisdom Ireland has Irish as our official language in the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_the_European_Union

With the UK going nobody has English as their official language.

It's not going to disappear but it's a lot less important now. Much like the UK

I wonder what language the Slovaks will use when conversing with the Spanish, or what the Dutch will use when conversing with Germans, or what all of them will use when conversing with the multitude of American multinationals.

Juncker can have his petty little language digs if he likes, the reality is that thanks to English being the main language of the worlds most important economy, English is the world's business language.

Rightwing

djpbarry wrote: »

The CIA is a media outlet now, is it?

The media repeats what organisations say. If the CIA makes up a pile of shi!e, the media trust them, but after aa few bogus stories, no knows whether it's fake or not.

Memnoch wrote: »

I have come to realise that, regrettably, the system is only a reflection of human nature.

People are inherently selfish. So they vote for politicians who promise to do something 'for them,' rather than say look for politicians who will act with genuine integrity for the greater good of society or the country as a whole.

This leaves them easily open to manipulation and divide and conquer tactics by a political class, that once it wields power, only looks out for its own self interests rather than for those of the people who elected them.

Good post.
How long did it take you to realise this?

AnGaelach wrote: »

Well, you've already been told the reasons why. Immigration, constant encroachment of the EU, the globalisation of economies.

You're just choosing not to listen to the problems.

Indeed, but the whole point is that Governments are meant to listen to the people, why aren't they ?

AnGaelach

Rightwing wrote: »

Indeed, but the whole point is that Governments are meant to listen to the people, why aren't they ?

Well, a whole plethora of reasons - political pressure from Europe, lobbying from NGOs, personal interest in certain sectors of the economy. I don't think Governments are out to ruin their own people, I think some people are in order to facilitate the liberalisation of the economy and making everything more "business friendly" at the expense of the rest of the country.

If we're being completely honest, I think most politicians are just spineless.

Rightwing

AnGaelach wrote: »

Well, a whole plethora of reasons - political pressure from Europe, lobbying from NGOs, personal interest in certain sectors of the economy. I don't think Governments are out to ruin their own people, I think some people are in order to facilitate the liberalisation of the economy and making everything more "business friendly" at the expense of the rest of the country.

If we're being completely honest, I think most politicians are just spineless.

You nailed it.

This is where we must give the likes of Farage credit.

Calina

Queries about the status of English post Brexit are hysteria whipped up for political or media shifting reasons

The language regime doesn't change on their exit. It changes by unanimous agreement at Council.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/european-commission-rejects-claims-english-will-not-be-eu-language-1.2702734

I expect several countries would veto.

Memnoch

Rightwing wrote: »

You nailed it.

This is where we must give the likes of Farage credit.

I understand that you feel that immigration is the problem, and many who voted for brexit feel this way.

But is it really immigration that is the problem? Or is it low wages and lack of protection for workers rights that are the problem?

What about pressure on public services and housing? And my question is the same. Are these pressures there because of immigration, or is it because corporations are paying close to 0% tax? Because the government in the UK is cutting back services in order to avoid having to tax corporations and the ultra right?

You or I, when we earn over 40k we pay half our income in tax in Ireland. Yet how many countries in the world do corporations pay this kind of tax?

This is the great media con that the voting public are falling for. Reducing immigration is not going to raise wages and increase job opportunities, not in any tangible sense. Nor will it make any real difference to the public services in the UK that are being decimated by the Conservative government.

It's a red herring. Divide and conquer. Playing working class people against each other while the ultra rich line their pockets.

Let me propose, in theory, two laws.

For all products and services sold in Europe.

1. There should be clear transparency in how much each employee is being paid throughout the supply and manufacturing chain. To add to this, for any products/services sold in Europe, a minimum living wage must be paid, no matter where it is made. Will corporations still make the most profit by manufacturing outside of Europe? Or could this kind of ETHICAL PROTECTIONISM bring jobs back?

2. For all products and services sold in Europe, there will be a graded effective tax that will go as high as 60% after a certain level of income. You don't want to pay this tax? Don't sell to Europe. Other companies will fill the void, it's a big market. That's how capitalism works.

To mitigate the effects of rule 2 on countries like Ireland in the short-medium term, a fair chunk of the extra tax raised in Europe will be given to countries with previously low tax regimes.

Over the longer term the money raised in Europe will be enough that overall it will contribute much more than we are getting right now. More than enough to pay for public services and infrastructure and technology programs that can put people back to work.

Those same working people will spend the money in their pockets pumping it back into the economy.

Right now, we are having billions and billions being taken out of the UK and EU economy to go and rest in the off shore reserves of corporations and the ultra rich, to no good effect. It's pointless hoarding for the sake or hoarding. And it's obscene while people in the UK line up at foodbanks despite working full time jobs.

Professor Moriarty

Calina wrote: »

Queries about the status of English post Brexit are hysteria whipped up for political or media shifting reasons

The language regime doesn't change on their exit. It changes by unanimous agreement at Council.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/european-commission-rejects-claims-english-will-not-be-eu-language-1.2702734

I expect several countries would veto.

Absolutely. Whatever about its status within the EU, it is the lingua franca when doing business throughout the world.

Harry Palmr

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Deleted post.

I've no time for him but he proved he was a canny populist political operator. Ukip went from nothing to changing the UK for good in less than 20 years and he is the primary reason. Every movement needs a figure to rally round and he was it. I doubt he can believe it went so well for him and he knows that the lurking ghost of Ukip will keep the Tories "honest" on Brexit for years to come.

ancapailldorcha

Name calling is not acceptable on this forum. Posts deleted.

Professor Moriarty

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I've no time for him but he proved he was a canny populist political operator. Ukip went from nothing to changing the UK for good in less than 20 years and he is the primary reason. Every movement needs a figure to rally round and he was it. I doubt he can believe it went so well for him and he knows that the lurking ghost of Ukip will keep the Tories "honest" on Brexit for years to come.

Well, behind his chummy 'bloke down the pub' facade, he is a populist at heart (ala Trump and Le Pen) who, along with his party, deceived many foolish people into believing that he was the answer. His rhetoric is deeply jingoistic and his policy essentially seems to be a Little Englander 'Make Britain Great Again'. That's not going to happen, but disillusioned and angry Brits clutched at the straw he was offering. UKIP are toast now because the Little Englander Tories have taken some of their clothes.

To be honest, though I have a lot of English friends and like England and English people in general, I'm beginning to think 'Good Riddance' because of the persistent jingoism.

Rightwing

Memnoch wrote: »

I understand that you feel that immigration is the problem, and many who voted for brexit feel this way.

But is it really immigration that is the problem? Or is it low wages and lack of protection for workers rights that are the problem?

What about pressure on public services and housing? And my question is the same. Are these pressures there because of immigration, or is it because corporations are paying close to 0% tax? Because the government in the UK is cutting back services in order to avoid having to tax corporations and the ultra right?

You or I, when we earn over 40k we pay half our income in tax in Ireland. Yet how many countries in the world do corporations pay this kind of tax?

This is the great media con that the voting public are falling for. Reducing immigration is not going to raise wages and increase job opportunities, not in any tangible sense. Nor will it make any real difference to the public services in the UK that are being decimated by the Conservative government.

It's a red herring. Divide and conquer. Playing working class people against each other while the ultra rich line their pockets.

Let me propose, in theory, two laws.

For all products and services sold in Europe.

1. There should be clear transparency in how much each employee is being paid throughout the supply and manufacturing chain. To add to this, for any products/services sold in Europe, a minimum living wage must be paid, no matter where it is made. Will corporations still make the most profit by manufacturing outside of Europe? Or could this kind of ETHICAL PROTECTIONISM bring jobs back?

2. For all products and services sold in Europe, there will be a graded effective tax that will go as high as 60% after a certain level of income. You don't want to pay this tax? Don't sell to Europe. Other companies will fill the void, it's a big market. That's how capitalism works.

To mitigate the effects of rule 2 on countries like Ireland in the short-medium term, a fair chunk of the extra tax raised in Europe will be given to countries with previously low tax regimes.

Over the longer term the money raised in Europe will be enough that overall it will contribute much more than we are getting right now. More than enough to pay for public services and infrastructure and technology programs that can put people back to work.

Those same working people will spend the money in their pockets pumping it back into the economy.

Right now, we are having billions and billions being taken out of the UK and EU economy to go and rest in the off shore reserves of corporations and the ultra rich, to no good effect. It's pointless hoarding for the sake or hoarding. And it's obscene while people in the UK line up at foodbanks despite working full time jobs.

But mass immigration causes these problems. If it was done in a controlled manner I doubt we would be having this conversation.
Also, the EU is too economically and culturally diverse. Are countries like Romania really ready to be in it?

I agree about C Tax, and the pity is the US had a high tax rate and they have to reduce it, although economically they will struggle to get it too low.

KindOfIrish

Rightwing wrote: »

But mass immigration causes these problems. If it was done in a controlled manner I doubt we would be having this conversation.
Also, the EU is too economically and culturally diverse. Are countries like Romania really ready to be in it?

I agree about C Tax, and the pity is the US had a high tax rate and they have to reduce it, although economically they will struggle to get it too low.

Believe me, Romanians (and any other Eastern Europeans) are the list immigration problem in England and it has nothing to do with EU.

Rightwing

KindOfIrish wrote: »

Believe me, Romanians (and any other Eastern Europeans) are the list immigration problem in England and it has nothing to do with EU.

Yes and No.

It's not simple. Most of them certainly add value and work hard. Personally, I've never had a problem with any foreigner of any description. But to analyse situations, you need to look at it from a broad persepctive.

Types of problems:
Working class people feel threatened, if say Polish painters can do an equally good job for say half the price, and they can. I've no issue here, in fact it is to be welcomed. But it is a problem for the working class painter.
I heard on the radio recently some of these people were taking out tiny fish and searching for duck eggs on the banks of rivers. I have a big problem with this.

oscarBravo

Rightwing wrote: »

But mass immigration causes these problems.

[citation needed]

djpbarry

Memnoch wrote: »

It's not that easy when you don't have a high level of education...

Well, I tend not to equate education with intelligence, but anyway, we're talking about a pretty sizeable chunk of the population in a developed country - for me, lack of education/intelligence really doesn't provide a sufficient explanation.

Memnoch wrote: »

This is how, for example, the Guardian and papers like it have managed to convince a lot of people that somehow Corbyn should be blamed for brexit.

I have to be honest, I don't think I've ever heard it said that Corbyn is to be blamed for Brexit. I've heard it said plenty that he's about as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike and that he certainly could have done more to campaign against Brexit, but I can't say I've heard too many people put the blame for the whole debacle at his door.