Brexit discussion thread IV

kowtow

kowtow wrote: »

This thread is as close to an echo chamber as any I have ever found!

But with intelligent debate from what I can see. Still makes me a little unsettled at the discourse.

Mr.Nice Guy

I find the parallels with this and the Anglo-Irish Treaty talks quite striking.

The Irish delegates sent to negotiate in London were asking the British to compromise on something that for them was a core principle - the integrity of the Empire; and they regarded the demand of an independent Irish republic as unreasonable. At the centre of this issue was what to do with Ulster, with an irritated James Craig anxiously looking on.

The Irish delegates meanwhile had hard-liners in the background to contend with - Brugha, Stack and so on - who were insistent there could be no compromise on the core ideals of Ireland's independence struggle.

What the 'end game' was no one was really sure. Irish independence had brought together many different strands of thought, from Griffith's dual-monarchy ideas, to de Valera's innovative but untested external association proposals, to the more ideological members who insisted the Republic outlined in the Proclamation was sacrosanct.

Amidst all this, de Valera's instructions to the plenipotentiaries were "if you have to break the negotiations, do it over Ulster." The reason being that everyone concluded - correctly - that the public at large, home and abroad, would care little for Ireland's objections of Dominion Status vs a Republic, but they would be sympathetic about the country having to put up with permanent partition. Therefore, to win sympathy, blame it on an Ulster impasse.

Now here we are almost 100 years later, only this time it's the British that are leaving a Union while asking for the Union they're departing from to compromise on its core principles. The dynamic has changed with the British now the ones travelling from a position of weakness in search of a deal, although with one added headache - the problem of unionists cannot now be sidelined in the way Craig feared he would be, and the way Carson would later say he felt he and his unionism had been.

Those on the British side are dealing with their own hard-liners, but with no strong de Valera presence to bring them into line, albeit in an uneasy way. Instead the hard Brexiteers snipe and pour scorn at every turn, some calling for talks to end altogether. What is similar is that the end-goal of these people is undefined, and they can't cobble together a reasonable alternative to the Chequers plans they mock.

But here the most interesting parallel: May's tactic, as seen clearly today, seems to be the same as the instructions given to Collins, Griffith and co. before the Treaty talks - if you must break, do so over the border. Now it is May saying to the world, "you can't expect us to put up with a divided country." The incredible irony of her words are either lost on her, or she simply doesn't care. Probably the latter.

The question is what happens now. It was a Boundary Commission idea, which would later turn out to be nothing like what Lloyd George suggested it would be, which proved enough to get the issue of the border resolved in the minds of Ireland's plenipotentiaries. Added to this a gradual rising of tension and a late threat of "terrible, terrible war" which got the deal over the line.

Is there still a way for some flexible wording to give May some wriggle room to bring back a deal to try and sell to her public? Might it also require a ratcheting up of tension, resulting in a threat - this time not of war, but of economic and political hardship?

Collins famously, and prophetically, remarked upon signing up to the Anglo-Irish Treaty, "I have signed my own death warrant." Does May possess the character and the leadership to be able to risk everything in signing up to a deal which she believes to be for the greater good? The signs up this point, and what we've heard today, suggest the answer is that she does not.

ilovesmybrick

Deleted User wrote: »

I wonder if perhaps the general feeling in this thread is similar to Brexit itself. Lots of posters, including me feeling that them crashing out, while not a preferable option, is seen as a greater good.

Is this an echo chamber?

Look, it's entirely possible that the majority of people here are incorrect and Brexit could turn out to be great for the UK. However, there has been no move the British government have taken recently that demonstrate that they can make a success of this. The British Political establishment have been arguing with themselves since the start of 2016 about what this means and still can't agree on anything. They can't negotiate with people that they have been negotiating alongside for forty years, and they seem to think that they can create a successful post-Brexit economy by making deals with far more cut throat negotiators without any evidence to the contrary. Perhaps with a less divided political situation and a stable government they could, but this crowd are incompetent. Maybe it's an echo chamber, but I think there's a very valid rationale for that!

Leroy42

kowtow wrote: »

This thread is as close to an echo chamber as any I have ever found!

So put forward the alternative ideas and people can debate them.

How is the UK, as it is currently constituted, must choose, based on the current EU positions, with either leaving the EU and a border in NI, or staying in the EU.

The UK have asked, and been refused, a special deal. Whilst that may upset them, it is not unfair for the other party to want to stick to their ideals.

It is not an echo chamber, its just that no one, not even the UK government, and TM has been working day and night apparently for 18 months, have come up with a deal that will get the EU to shift their position.

revelman

kowtow wrote: »

This thread is as close to an echo chamber as any I have ever found!

Having just popped in here for the first time today, this does look like an echo chamber. I am speaking as somone who is generally pro EU but concerned about our relationship with the UK. Nice talking to you all. I think I will head back to the weather forum where im usually not accused by other posters of talking 'sh#te'!

Infini

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I wonder if perhaps the general feeling in this thread is similar to Brexit itself. Lots of posters, including me feeling that them crashing out, while not a preferable option, is seen as a greater good.

Is this an echo chamber?

I wouldn't say "greater good" is the word of it. The general feeling would be more that they're illogical idiots and refuse to listen to reason, accept they're the weaker party and this is only happening the way it is because they refuse to accept the consequences of what will happen due to their own failures and dysfunctional politics.

Let's be clear if were gonna have a hard brexit its better to do away with the facades if they refuse to listen and prepare for the worst now while we have time than whittle down time on a false hope theyll cop on. We cant save them from their own stupidity.

Professor Moriarty

revelman wrote: »

Having just popped in here for the first time today, this does look like an echo chamber. I am speaking as somone who is generally pro EU but concerned about our relationship with the UK. Nice talking to you all. I think I will head back to the weather forum where im usually not accused by other posters of talking 'sh#te'!

Who accused you of talking sh1te? At least you and Kow Tow offer a differing opinion which I personally respect considering that the vast majority of people on here might disagree with many of your points. It is not, however, an 'echo chamber'. That's just a silly and facile cop out.

Kristopherus

briany wrote: »

The assembly which isn't currently sitting, and even if it was, the leading party's position is that they don't want any divergence.

Classic example of tail wagging the dog:mad:

LuckyLloyd

dfx- wrote: »

PM of what, for what though.

Having the job that no-one else wants, not even the Opposition with now added international humiliation.

She's a career politician in her sixties. This is the summit, it's all downhill from here. She's just trying to extend it as long as possible.

Lemming

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Who accused you of talking sh1te? At least you and Kow Tow offer a differing opinion which I personally respect considering that the vast majority of people on here might disagree with many of your points. It is not, however, an 'echo chamber'. That's just a silly and facile cop out.

I said to drop the faux outrage sh1te over Tusk, as the UK has been engaged in much worse for the last 18 months. I did not accuse the OP of talking sh1te.

revelman

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Who accused you of talking sh1te? At least you and Kow Tow offer a differing opinion which I personally respect considering that the vast majority of people on here might disagree with many of your points. It is not, however, an 'echo chamber'. That's just a silly and facile cop out.

I wasnt referring to your interesting posts. Somebody a few pages back accused me of 'faux outrage sh#te'. I was also surprised by the general tone of other posts. It is probably just me. I am not used to posting in political threads so unused to the style of argumentation.

Calina

revelman wrote: »

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Indeed it is worth remembering that fact. And there is a very good reason for that - the EU has been very good to us. I think you are missing other important facts. Unlike other EU countries, we have a land border with Britain. Unlike other countries, peace in our country may be threatened by Brexit. Unlike other countries, our economy is severely threatened by Brexit. Unlike other countries, much of our exports pass through Britain. Much more than any other country in Europe, we have a lot to lose.

I am in 100 per cent full agreement with you. Im not sure how my posts gave the impression that I do no understand those things. My central concern is how (to use Barnier's phrase) things can be dramatised and then become more intractable.

By kowtowing to the UK tabloids and pussyfooting around them. Giving the tabloids any power was the single most stupid thing the Tory party ever did.

Donald Tusk's wry sense of irony is one of the reasons I find him refreshing. I particularly appreciate leaders who don't actually crawl around in the sark hoping not to upset the tabloids. The UK could do with about 600 Donald Tusks.

Sassygirl1999

I'd like to join a new phrase we are headed for the " Brexit Cliff "as in fiscal cliff etc, how many cliffs have we had in recent years, debt cliff etc.

Professor Moriarty

revelman wrote: »

I wasnt referring to your interesting posts. Somebody a few pages back accused me of 'faux outrage sh#te'. I was also surprised by the general tone of other posts. It is probably just me. I am not used to posting in political threads so unused to the style of argumentation.

Brexit is so potentially damaging to Ireland that posters on an Irish discussion site will naturally be animated. People get incensed by politics. At least it shows they care.

Zubeneschamali

If by "echo chamber" you mean that the vast majority think Brexit is a bad idea, then yes, I am sure it is.

But we are not just here to agree with each other about that, we are here to argue about just HOW bad, whether it is even possible, Boris v. Rees-Mogg for PM next, etc. etc.

kowtow

revelman wrote: »

Having just popped in here for the first time today, this does look like an echo chamber. I am speaking as somone who is generally pro EU but concerned about our relationship with the UK. Nice talking to you all. I think I will head back to the weather forum where im usually not accused by other posters of talking 'sh#te'!

I know what you mean.

Nobody in the farming forum has ever so much as dreamed of posting a instagram photograph of me looking for cake.

We are all very diplomatic over there.

Leroy42

And to add, the total disdain that the UK have shown towards Ireland throughout this process, even yesterday simply telling Leo that she hadn't got any details and wasn't overly bothered about October and he would have to wait.

Of course that is going to upset a few people.

That her feelings were hurt and she now comes out with, IMO, a pitiful and whining speech is a disgrace. Continued promises of future details. THey have had two years to sort this out. SHe has been claiming all along that she will make a success of Brexit yet she doesn't even have a plan for the most contencious issue of the whole thing.

That is what is really insulting. The EU, and Ireland, have been lied to again and again.

PeadarCo

kowtow wrote:

This thread is as close to an echo chamber as any I have ever found!

Look what you are getting is what I imagine is primarily an Irish view on Brexit and everything that goes with that. Ireland would like a soft border and in an ideal world to stay in the EU for a whole host of economic and political reasons.

However a no deal would be bad for Ireland but disastrous for the UK. This is a position backed up by a wide range of organisations. Brexiters for a hard Brexit are so weak they have had to use idea of project fear. So of course when you have a reasonablly intelligent debate on Brexit of course it's going to turn into an echo chamber. Brexit rely completely on emotional arguments and once you strip that away there's not much to say.

The problem with the Irish border is that is an emotional area for both the UK and Ireland. To a certain degree the issue of the border in Northern Ireland has become a debate about unification and all that backage which I don't think has helped the issue. However this should have been obvious even before the vote. Brexit was always going to put Ireland in a position to choose who the country wants better trade relations with the UK or EU. For Northern Ireland they have the same question with the added complication that it has no functioning government and the ultimate decision would always remain in London.

Lemming

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Brexit is so potentially damaging to Ireland that posters on an Irish discussion site will naturally be animated. People get incensed by politics. At least it shows they care.

Some of us also live at ground-zero, proverbially speaking ... I do not relish the prospect of having to deal with an increasingly racist & kafka-esque Home-Office just to sleep in my own bed.

LuckyLloyd

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If by "echo chamber" you mean that the vast majority think Brexit is a bad idea, then yes, I am sure it is.

But we are not just here to agree with each other about that, we are here to argue about just HOW bad, whether it is even possible, Boris v. Rees-Mogg for PM next, etc. etc.

And we all have different areas of focus and interest. I personally have lost interest in the internal Conservative party politicking whereas many people will be fascinated by that. demfad is extremely interested in the information / disinformation side of the whole thing. Some posters here are entirely focussed on the border. Some are really interested in how this whole nightmare highlights the working and process of the EU. And so on, and so on.

If anyone has hard facts around how Brexit is a defensible idea that offers people a better future and is more deserving of respect as an ideology by all means throw them out there. I don't find the Telegraph in the least convincing on the issue, but I took out a subscription to it last year because I want to understand where the other side are coming from.

Professor Moriarty

Lemming wrote: »

Some of us also live at ground-zero, proverbially speaking ... I do not relish the prospect of having to deal with an increasingly racist & kafka-esque Home-Office just to sleep in my own bed.

Especially, in the event of a hard Brexit, if Irish 'intransigence' is blamed for no deal. It's not that long ago when anti-Irish sentiment was rife in Britain.

Spook_ie

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It was a joke. Political humour and satire are important elements of British culture or at least they used to be.

Political humour and satire are what you'd expect from the likes of the tabloids and spitting image not from a senior statesperson, yet another wannabe Trump.

revelman

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If by "echo chamber" you mean that the vast majority think Brexit is a bad idea, then yes, I am sure it is.

But we are not just here to agree with each other about that, we are here to argue about just HOW bad, whether it is even possible, Boris v. Rees-Mogg for PM next, etc. etc.

I know I said I was going back to the weather forum but one last point. Whatever one's views on Brexit, I think most can agree that it is better to have civil discourse in the exit negotiations. That is not to say that things wont get heated but when they do politicians on both sides have a responsibility not to dramatise.

In observing debates on Brexit, whether on here or elsewhere, I always get the impression that underlying many people's responses is (for want of a better word) Schadenfreude or at least the hope for Schadenfreude. We want to stick it to the Brits, to say I told you so. I think this is an understandable and very human reaction. But it is a dangerous sentiment. History provides lessons on what can happen when one side in treaty negiotiations is more powerful than the other. Anything that the more powerful side says or does that can be interpreted as offensive or humiliating can have dire consequences.

sameoldname

revelman wrote: »

I know I said I was going back to the weather forum but one last point. Whatever one's views on Brexit, I think most can agree that it is better to have civil discourse in the exit negotiations. That is not to say that things wont get heated but when they do politicians on both sides have a responsibility not to dramatise.

In observing debates on Brexit, whether on here or elsewhere, I always get the impression that underlying many people's responses is (for want of a better word) Schadenfreude or at least the hope for Schadenfreude. We want to stick it to the Brits, to say I told you so. I think this is an understandable and very human reaction. But it is a dangerous sentiment. History provides lessons on what can happen when one side in treaty negiotiations is more powerful than the other. Anything that the more powerful side says or does that can be interpreted as offensive or humiliating can have dire consequences.

To be honest, I find the most offensive stuff to be coming out of British mouths. The closest you could say anyone has been to undiplomatic on the EU side has been Guy Verhofstadt and he isn't really too much of a key figure.

Sam Russell

revelman wrote: »

I know I said I was going back to the weather forum but one last point. Whatever one's views on Brexit, I think most can agree that it is better to have civil discourse in the exit negotiations. That is not to say that things wont get heated but when they do politicians on both sides have a responsibility not to dramatise.

In observing debates on Brexit, whether on here or elsewhere, I always get the impression that underlying many people's responses is (for want of a better word) Schadenfreude or at least the hope for Schadenfreude. We want to stick it to the Brits, to say I told you so. I think this is an understandable and very human reaction. But it is a dangerous sentiment. History provides lessons on what can happen when one side in treaty negiotiations is more powerful than the other. Anything that the more powerful side says or does that can be interpreted as offensive or humiliating can have dire consequences.

I think you are talking about the likes of Bismarck and the Ems telegram that was edited to be insulting and gave rise to the Franco-Prussian war, which was Bismarc's wish.

I doubt that Tusk's little joke is in the same league.

Infini

revelman wrote: »

Having just popped in here for the first time today, this does look like an echo chamber. I am speaking as somone who is generally pro EU but concerned about our relationship with the UK. Nice talking to you all. I think I will head back to the weather forum where im usually not accused by other posters of talking 'sh#te'!

I've seen a few echo chambers but this isnt one of them. There's logical debate here and reasoning being used since the start. Fact is Brexit is a bad idea and what's getting people more agitated is the fact that as we hit endgame all the brits have shown for it is 2 years of infighting and constant idelogical arguments that dont stand up to hard scrutiny.

The EU27 and expecially Ireland were strait off the bat the day of the referendum organising plans and figuring out what to do while the brits weren't even able to organise a bloody negotiating position. Now were faced with economic damage from all this only because the conservatives let themselves be beholden to the DUP idiots and boxed themselves into a corner over it.

Any competent government at this stage would be organising a 2nd referendum to at least cover their arses or to see if the will is still there to go through with this but the ideologues refuse to contemplate this obvious way out of this whole mess.

Fact is at this point time's running out and people are fed up with it. The brits from our side of the fence are looking impotent, paralysed by idiots and unwilling to contemplate the sheer seriousness of what they're wanting to commit all the while blaming the EU for their failures. If things are getting animated its not because this place is an echo chamber but because all the arguments against brexit seem to be coming to pass as each day passes and the only thing the brits seem to be doing is repeat the same tired, disproven arguments while acting like theyre the stronger party. Its obvious and blatent brinkmanship and bluffing.

This is the endgame period and unless theres a drastic change on the UK side were looking at a hard brexit caused solely by the UK side and noone else. The EU side has remained cordial over this but I dont blame Tusk or Macron for dispensing with the pleasentaries at this point and getting serious because they know that its getting too serious to play nice with the clock running down. We have to know what to prepare for and have enough time to organise if a Hard Brexit is inevitable but the closer to the 29th March this becomes certain the less time to prepare we have.

Leroy42

revelman wrote: »

I know I said I was going back to the weather forum but one last point. Whatever one's views on Brexit, I think most can agree that it is better to have civil discourse in the exit negotiations. That is not to say that things wont get heated but when they do politicians on both sides have a responsibility not to dramatise.

In observing debates on Brexit, whether on here or elsewhere, I always get the impression that underlying many people's responses is (for want of a better word) Schadenfreude or at least the hope for Schadenfreude. We want to stick it to the Brits, to say I told you so. I think this is an understandable and very human reaction. But it is a dangerous sentiment. History provides lessons on what can happen when one side in treaty negiotiations is more powerful than the other. Anything that the more powerful side says or does that can be interpreted as offensive or humiliating can have dire consequences.

Totally disagree. The EU have gone out of its way to try to facilitate the UK and in particular TM. They were quite within their rights to dismiss Chequers out of hand, but instead allowed it to continue on the basis that it was something to work from.

They allowed a change in the original December agreement, as May was unable to carry the junior party with her.

On both of these, TM has used this facilitation as a sign of weakness and instead of looking to build on the progress, looked to hammer home her perceived advantage.

The EU needs to look out for itself. Sure they is the feeling that all these issues were flagged prior to the vote itself, by many except the UK wouldn't listen, but even since then the EU have shown a willingness to work through a process with the aim of getting a deal that respected the UK's desire to leave but didn't do harm to the EU because of that.

Show some examples of where the UK have acted in an honest fashion during this process. From the lies of the campaign itself, to lying about the December agreement, to lying about having stuff ready by certain dates. They have constantly threatened not to pay their legal obligations.

Call me Al

revelman wrote: »

I seem to be in a minority of one here in thinking that Donald Tusk should have better things to be doing than antagonising half the British population.

Why?
TM clearly had no issue antagonizing some of her own citizens when she got into bed with the DUP and allowed them to dictate T&C's of the withdrawal agreement.

megaten

revelman wrote: »

I know I said I was going back to the weather forum but one last point. Whatever one's views on Brexit, I think most can agree that it is better to have civil discourse in the exit negotiations. That is not to say that things wont get heated but when they do politicians on both sides have a responsibility not to dramatise.

I don't think smarmy social media post are helpful but where would you go in the UK to get civil discourse over Brexit?

revelman

sameoldname wrote: »

To be honest, I find the most offensive stuff to be coming out of British mouths. The closest you could say anyone has been to undiplomatic on the EU side has been Guy Verhofstadt and he isn't really too much of a key figure.

I think the Brits have said some silly and unhelpful things. But the key point I am trying to stress is the inequality of bargaining power. Half of the UK's exports go to the rest of the EU. Only 8% of the rest of the EU's exports go to the UK. In any negotiation, the more powerful party has special responsibilities