Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Enzokk

Folkstonian wrote: »

I won’t pretend that I think they are concerns entirely without merit. I don’t think there are great numbers of people in Britain who would. But it’s all about compromise, and looking at how much return you get for the powers you give over to the European Union.

Even the phrase you used there, giving powers over to the EU. That makes it sound as if the UK has had to surrender decisions to an institution that it has no control over. We know this is not true but the phrase you just used and that was used extensively during the campaign is not an accurate assessment of the true position of the UK before Brexit.

lawred2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm starting to think of Corbyn as a "Disaster Socialist" to be honest. He's happy for economic catastrophe to launch him to power whereupon he will be able to enact his agenda.

The Labour party is an awkward coalition of Blairite liberals, socialists, working class loyalists and metropolitan socialists. However, by shying away from providing any sort of opposition, Corbyn undermines his own claim to be a man of principle.



Probably some subreddits. In my experience, people there tend to be either fairly centrist, liberal and very Remain leaning or out and out Trumpish Brexiteers. So, yes. The same polarization that infects popular discourse is very much there as well.

I'm not sure even with a disastrous post apocalyptic Brexit that Corbyn will ever prove to be electable

ancapailldorcha

lawred2 wrote: »

I'm not sure even with a disastrous post apocalyptic Brexit that Corbyn will ever electable

I'd say that the idea of voting for someone other than the Tories will cinch it for him.

Enzokk

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'd say that the idea of voting for someone other than the Tories will cinch it for him.

Also, the Tories still have to claim the past 8 years of policies and austerity and whatever happens with Brexit they were in place before the vote and that is what Labour will focus on. You can see this with Corbyn and wanting to talk about domestic policies instead of Brexit on a Brexit debate shows he knows what could win him the next election. The question is though if Brexit is a disaster what portion of blame he will have to burden seeing as he is not providing any opposition to it.

lawred2

Enzokk wrote: »

Also, the Tories still have to claim the past 8 years of policies and austerity and whatever happens with Brexit they were in place before the vote and that is what Labour will focus on. You can see this with Corbyn and wanting to talk about domestic policies instead of Brexit on a Brexit debate shows he knows what could win him the next election. The question is though if Brexit is a disaster what portion of blame he will have to burden seeing as he is not providing any opposition to it.

Seems a bit farcical to point to Tory austerity of the past decade when you've stood idly by offering no alternative as the Tories delivered the single most devastating and long lasting blow to the British economy of all.. a blow that could lead to another decade's worth of austerity but this time under a labour government.

He's toxic

Beechwoodspark

lawred2 wrote: »

I'm not sure even with a disastrous post apocalyptic Brexit that Corbyn will ever prove to be electable

Probably off the point of this thread but My advice to corbyn watchers is to keep in mind he is a total and utter leftwing ideologue. He’s spent decades up to his neck in it. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.

He is far too much of an impractical man bound by theory to ever be an effective PM.

Enzokk

lawred2 wrote: »

Seems a bit farcical to point to Tory austerity of the past decade when you've stood idly by offering no alternative as the Tories delivered the single most devastating and long lasting blow to the British economy of all.. a blow that could lead to another decade's worth of austerity but this time under a labour government.

He's toxic

Yes he is toxic, but he is not the other party as pointed out by ancapailldorcha.

VonZan

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'd say that the idea of voting for someone other than the Tories will cinch it for him.

I think that's overly optimistic. Corbyn has been incredibly weak on Brexit. Labour are in dire need of new leadership. The Tories will still be the biggest party at the next election and that is a damning indictment of Corbyn's leadership with the absolute chaos that is the Tory party.

Itssoeasy

Headshot wrote: »

Another defeat for May tonight.

Good thing it proves there's no majority for leaving the EU without a deal

What was the vote on that proves that ?

Tell me how

Enzokk wrote: »

Yes he is toxic, but he is not the other party as pointed out by ancapailldorcha.

I have found myself having some level of respect for Theresa May and loathing for Jeremy Corbyn.

I'm not going to mention the many many things she has done wrong but I think she has been somewhat motivated to get a deal that will work for Britain while still delivering on the referendum. But the other guy?

If my house was on fire, I'd have more time for the person p*ssing on the flames than the one saying that a fire hydrant should be used while they sit on their hands.

S.M.B.

I'm going to struggle with my vote in the next GE if Corbyn is there.

I'd also love to see how he'd go down at a Glastonbury appearance this year? I was there in 2016 and if be stunned of the festival going public hold him in such high regard right now because of his stance on brexit.

Headshot

Itssoeasy wrote: »

What was the vote on that proves that ?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/08/cross-party-alliance-of-mps-tells-may-we-will-stop-no-deal-brexit

cml387

Much as we might like to ignore the point,Corbyn's view of the EU corresponds with big proportion of his working class voters, if not with his parliamentary party.

Calina

cml387 wrote: »

Much as we might like to ignore the point,Corbyn's view of the EU corresponds with big proportion of his working class voters, if not with his parliamentary party.

Except it doesn't. He is currently at odds with a majority of Labour voters on the question od a second referendum, for example. And Islington was something like 76% pro remain in the last referendum. Corbyn represents Islington North. So even his own constituency is at odds with him here.

RobMc59

cml387 wrote: »

Much as we might like to ignore the point,Corbyn's view of the EU corresponds with big proportion of his working class voters, if not with his parliamentary party.

Most ordinary working class voters don't particularly like his extreme left wing views which are reminiscent of 1960s/70's Britain.

ThePanjandrum

listermint wrote: »

Well I don't have to look far for Minsters telling us that they will be invited into former colonies who will seek to be 'guided' by Britain in trade relations. As if Britain were the source of all Political guidance.

There's an arrogance in those statements, I'm sure you've seen them yourself. Tell me what you would read from Minsters making such proclamations ?

Name the ministers who have said that.

By the way, how's the membership of the Francophonie going for you? I'd be interested to hear.

An Ciarraioch

Just heard the final few minutes of the last programme on Radio Four, but even that was intriguing listening - compared Brexit to the early 1900s debates over protectionism vs free trade, highlights that the two major parties of the era were fundamentally divided, and that Irish nationalists and unionists were similarly pivotal to both debates:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0001xs9

J Mysterio

Beechwoodspark wrote:

he is a total and utter leftwing ideologue. He’s spent decades up to his neck in it. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.

He is far too much of a impractical man bound by theory to ever be an effective PM.

Agreed. I also think he fancies himself a genius, like a Cicero there in the senate house.

S.M.B. wrote: »

I'm going to struggle with my vote in the next GE if Corbyn is there.

I'd also love to see how he'd go down at a Glastonbury appearance this year? I was there in 2016 and if be stunned of the festival going public hold him in such high regard right now because of his stance on brexit.

Its such a cheap trick to show up to Glastonbury anyway. 'Look kids! I'm hip, I'm with it!'. Contemptible.

If only the Lib Dems or Greens or anyone else had something to offer. Definitely room for a new party yonder. Even over here we had the PD's, Renua, PBP, Independent Alliance etc. UK politics is really in a bad place.

ThePanjandrum

Tell me how wrote: »

Is there a UK version of Boards where regular people discuss Brexit or is it all taking place on Twitter and Facebook.

I would be interested in viewing the assessment part of their opinions. I suspect the opinions themselves are typically polarised.

Try the various newspapers like the Guardian and Telegraph where there are large boards and membership is free.

However, do note that the Guardian, although it has the best commenting software, no longer opens many of its opinion pieces for comment and can be quite ruthless in "moderating" those who do not toe the official line.

ThePanjandrum

jm08 wrote: »

Sunderland has Nissan which is a lot more than a lot of regions have. Despite being told by Nissan to vote remain, they voted to leave. Explain that one!

Brits often have long fuses but they do not like being told what to do.

I'm always mystified by the way that the Irish had the guts to stand up against the treaty of Lisbon being foisted upon them but then, a mere 16 months later, you caved in. Why?

ThePanjandrum

Enzokk wrote: »

Even the phrase you used there, giving powers over to the EU. That makes it sound as if the UK has had to surrender decisions to an institution that it has no control over. We know this is not true but the phrase you just used and that was used extensively during the campaign is not an accurate assessment of the true position of the UK before Brexit.

Members of the EU do surrender decisions to an institution they have no power over. It's the nature of the beast. Why wouldn't democrats want to be able to change their government if they do not agree with its decisions.

Calina

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Members of the EU do surrender decisions to an institution they have no power over. It's the nature of the beast. Why wouldn't democrats want to be able to change their government if they do not agree with its decisions.

Uh, they do have power over.

ThePanjandrum

Sam Russell wrote: »

The UK continued to spend huge sums on defence, and in particular, on Nuclear weapons, first developing their own, and then buying the US ones. They have steadily reduced the forces over the years and now have a much smaller navy, army and air force, but are still prepared to deploy them in support of the US in wars that are really of no interest to the UK.

Why are they in Iraq, Syria, or Afghanistan?

Why do they need nuclear weapons that can only be used with the permission of the USA?

The Germans did well because they controlled the labour unions through cooperation, and did not spend on the military.

Britain does not need American permission to use its nuclear weapons although obviously it never wants to use them.

Germany did not spend on the military, it got other countries to do the spending for it.

ThePanjandrum

Calina wrote: »

Uh, they do have power over.

No, they don't, they have a degree of representation but most of the power in the EU is not wielded by the European Parliament.

And in the case of the UK, I think that it has the least number of MEPs in relation to its population of any member nation.

BonnieSituation

S.M.B. wrote: »

I'm going to struggle with my vote in the next GE if Corbyn is there.

I'd also love to see how he'd go down at a Glastonbury appearance this year? I was there in 2016 and if be stunned of the festival going public hold him in such high regard right now because of his stance on brexit.

I certainly hope you mean 2017?

I was stuck in that crowd and I've never been so embarrassed for my generation with that charlatan up there espousing "a better way".

It was awful.

Beechwoodspark

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I certainly hope you mean 2017?

I was stuck in that crowd and I've never been so embarrassed for my generation with that charlatan up there espousing "a better way".

It was awful.

All that whoa Jeremy corbyn chanting and “jezza is a proper lad” meme stuff was just a juvenile waste of time for all concerned

Capt'n Midnight

Remember the Plan B ferry and how we already knew that the getting the UK port up and running was unlikely


Well guess what ?
The mayor of Ostend has told the BBC the Belgian port will not be ready for a new ferry line in time for Brexit. :rolleyes:

bob mcbob

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Members of the EU do surrender decisions to an institution they have no power over. It's the nature of the beast. Why wouldn't democrats want to be able to change their government if they do not agree with its decisions.

Currently the UK is a member of -

United Nations (with permanent seat on the UN Security Council)
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
Council of Europe (CoE)
European Union (EU)
Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
International Monetary Fund (IMF)
World Trade Organisation (WTO)
Commonwealth
Interpol

To satisfy your need to "take back control" and not allow foreigners to make decisions for you, what international institution do you want to leave next?

prawnsambo

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

No, they don't, they have a degree of representation but most of the power in the EU is not wielded by the European Parliament.

And in the case of the UK, I think that it has the least number of MEPs in relation to its population of any member nation.

You're being very coy about who makes the decisions. For the record, it's the council of ministers. And have to be ratified by the MEPs.

Edit: And you have exactly the number of MEPs that you'd expect to have based on population. Are you just going to come on here, make a number of unsupported and incorrect statements and run away again? Because you'll find yourself on a lot of ignore lists with that sort of posting behaviour.

J Mysterio

You can have all the control you want when your country is lying in ruins. Not so great then. I also find that people who advance this argument have great difficulty in explaining exactly in which areas they need more control or where control is lacking. It's just emotional bollocks.