Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm struggling to think of any pro-EU newspapers other than the Guardian/Observer and Independent. On the other side are the Times, Telegraph, Mail, Sun, Star, Mirror, Express and nearly all of those have a much higher circulation individually than the others combined. The Sun has almost four times the circulation of the 'pro-EU' papers.

The Mail on Sunday was for remain. It's then-editor, Geordie Grieg is a remainer and now edits the Mail.

ToBeFrank123

Nostalgia likely played a part in the strong leave vote among older people. Things were always better in the past, even when they weren't.

Before EU membership, most people had probably a poor standard of living in the UK. Even those considered wealthy at the time, might today be considered mere middle class.

Also, corruption is likely a reason why the wealthy middle class are in favour of leave. Its very difficult to influence or buy influence in the EU. Its much easier when you can put a word in the ear of your local friendly MP who happens to be a member of the same clubs as you.

After Brexit, expect the laws of the UK to be heavily influenced by ex Etonians to the benefit of other ex Etonians. Or similar.

I would fear for workers rights and the environment in the UK post Brexit.

Varta

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You have a baseless claim based on a lazy stereotype and now you are moving the goalposts. I never claimed that this attitude does not exist, I simply asked for evidence that it played a significant role in returning a leave vote.

Hardly a baseless claim when it is shared by so many and regularly written about. As I said, you seem to view the British through rose tinted glasses.

Letwin_Larry

i think the whole immigration issue has had a big bearing, even though most immigrants into the UK are from outside the EU.
you could even draw a link between Bush n Blair's illegal invasion and destruction of Iraq, and the whole sh1tstorm that unleashed, ie the rise of ISIS and the collapse of Syria.

Of course people with a grudge or a bias are constantly looking for a scapegoat to project that bias and hatred onto. Farage was only too delighted to help them find one.

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The Mail on Sunday was for remain. It's then-editor, Geordie Grieg is a remainer and now edits the Mail.

I left the Sundays out of it because although some have high circulation, they're not as effective as the dailys in the drip-drip of misinformation and celebrity gossip.

Shelga

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can you provide a link to show that the leave vote was driven in any significant part by this colonial attitude you allude to?

.

Of the dozens of middle-aged men from the West Midlands I know who voted Brexit, a superiority complex, colonial complex, or whatever you’d like to call it, played a massive part.

These people simply think they are better than people from other countries. That’s the truth of it. No, they’re not going to come out and say that to a poll-taker, and no one is going to format a question like that in a survey anyway.

prawnsambo

Shelga wrote: »

Of the dozens of middle-aged men from the West Midlands I know who voted Brexit, a superiority complex, colonial complex, or whatever you’d like to call it, played a massive part.

These people simply think they are better than people from other countries. That’s the truth of it. No, they’re not going to come out and say that to a poll-taker, and no one is going to format a question like that in a survey anyway.

"Do you think Britain could re-establish the empire once it leaves the EU?"

I'd like to try and ask that question, just to see if it would elicit the kind of response referred to.

Tired Gardener

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think there is a negative bias in the UK towards the EU.

For example:

1. UK: FoM means 'they' can come over 'here' (UK) and take our jobs and clog up the NHS while claiming benefits. Mind you, Spain is a super cheap place to retire, but the locals speak Spanish there, but there are loads of Brits so you do not have to learn it.
Rest of EU: 'We' can go over 'there'. FoM means we can travel to other parts of the EU, learn a new language and culture, and maybe settle a while.

2: UK: EU regulations are the EU trying to control us, and do daft things like prevent us enjoying our milk chocolate-flavoured confections.
RofEU: EU Regulations mean that we can trust labels to tel the truth, and that products are safe for us to use or consume. More regulations are safer.

3: UK: We pay too much into the EU.
RofEU: We pay into the EU so that poorer regions can get out of poverty, and, besides, we get back better results and at less cost than if we had to do ourselves all the things EU does by combined effort of the many EU institutions.

Plus many more.

The UK are just not team players at the international level. They think they have a 'special' relationship with the USA, but the real 'special' relationship that the USA has is with Ireland, and possibly Israel. The UK is considered quaint by most Americans. I have never heard an American claim to be UK-American or even British-American.

I agree with all of what you have said, apart from saying that there is no 'special agreement' between the UK and the USA. Because that is factual incorrect, a quick Google search will show that the 'SA' has been around since 1941.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement

The media in the UK are I believe to blame for a lot of the anti-EU lies that get thrown around, Banning Milk Chocolate, banning bendy bananas, etc. Sadly the UK's educational institution isn't aimed at equipping people with the tools to think critically. So they lap this up, while also living in some of the biggest wealth gaps in all of Europe. The richest region in Western Europe is London, 9 of the poorest regions are with in the UK... 6/7 of those are in the North of England. Then add in 10 years of austerity and seeing the quality of life go down.

Add in that the UK has only recently lost its Empire (1996/7), and a good number of people who were alive to vote in the 2016 referendum would have had a miss placed love of the Empire. From their perspective they have seen things being lost. We know he Empire was a horrific thing, but to some it was seen as a badge if pride.

It really wasn't a surprise that the UK voted to Leave, what is surprising is that the Remain vote was as high as it was.

Brexit is a beast birthed from many bastards. I also think that it is the wrestle with its own identity that the UK needs. The UK needs to shed off the old, and be able to play fairly with a group where it is an equal.

ancapailldorcha

Shelga wrote: »

Of the dozens of middle-aged men from the West Midlands I know who voted Brexit, a superiority complex, colonial complex, or whatever you’d like to call it, played a massive part.

These people simply think they are better than people from other countries. That’s the truth of it. No, they’re not going to come out and say that to a poll-taker, and no one is going to format a question like that in a survey anyway.

If they'll admit to being proud of the Empire and that it left the vassals better off in one as per the Yougov survey cited in Varta's Guardian link above then this would be a small leap. No evidence means that it is just an opinion.

Shelga

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If they'll admit to being proud of the Empire and that it left the vassals better off in one as per the Yougov survey cited in Varta's Guardian link above then this would be a small leap. No evidence means that it is just an opinion.

Yes, it’s my opinion, based on working with these people for years. Isn’t this a forum to offer opinions?

prawnsambo

Tired Gardener wrote: »

I agree with all of what you have said, apart from saying that there is no 'special agreement' between the UK and the USA. Because that is factual incorrect, a quick Google search will show that the 'SA' has been around since 1941.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement

That's not quite the same thing as the so-called special relationship. Five Eyes is a signals intelligence co-operative that existed (as you say) since 1941. The special relationship is supposed to be a kind of entente cordiale between the USA and the UK. Supposedly making them allies as well as trade partners. The trade partnership has fallen away with the UK joining the EU and never amounted to much in any case and the alliance didn't hold up well during the Falklands War when the USA felt that their relationship with Argentina was more important.

Joe_ Public

This reminds me of the time when he was education minister Gove tried to alter the schools history curriculum to reflect a much more glorious view of british history, but was fought by academics and teachers and he backed off. But that's what they have to fight against, hard enough to actually get young people engaged without feeding them self-serving guff and lies.

briany

prawnsambo wrote: »

"Do you think Britain could re-establish the empire once it leaves the EU?"

I don't think that there are really any Brexiteers who wish to see a return of the British Empire (apart from the few requisite nutters), but I think there are a lot of Brexiteers who think that, once, the United Kingdom was a colossus which strode the world as an unrivalled economic, military and cultural power, and that Britain has the potential to be a world power again. Not necessarily re-establish the empire or anything like that, but certainly something a ways beyond what they see as vassalage.

Zubeneschamali

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can you provide a link to show that the leave vote was driven in any significant part by this colonial attitude you allude to?.

Whitehall officials were even describing the post-Brexit deals in Africa as Empire 2.0

Shelga

prawnsambo wrote: »

"Do you think Britain could re-establish the empire once it leaves the EU?"

I'd like to try and ask that question, just to see if it would elicit the kind of response referred to.

“Do you think life in Britain was generally better when the British Empire was at its peak?” You’ll get a hell of a lot of yeses.

Zubeneschamali

Johnson on problems in ex-colonies: The problem is not that we were once in charge, but that we are not in charge any more... Consider Uganda, pearl of Africa, as an example of the British record. … the British planted coffee and cotton and tobacco, and they were broadly right... If left to their own devices, the natives would rely on nothing but the instant carbohydrate gratification of the plantain. You never saw a place so abounding in bananas: great green barrel-sized bunches, off to be turned into matooke. Though this dish (basically fried banana) was greatly relished by Idi Amin, the colonists correctly saw that the export market was limited... The best fate for Africa would be if the old colonial powers, or their citizens, scrambled once again in her direction; on the understanding that this time they will not be asked to feel guilty.

ancapailldorcha

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Whitehall officials were even describing the post-Brexit deals in Africa as Empire 2.0

How many of the 17.4 million leave voters do they constitute?

Going Strong

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Whitehall officials were even describing the post-Brexit deals in Africa as Empire 2.0

In fairness that was more in a mocking tone in response to the cadre of Ministerial 'talents' and their hubristic notions of selling innovative jam to Botswana and telling the former colonies how they should buy British or else.

ToBeFrank123

Most of the downturns in the UK were unrelated to EU membership since they joined.

The problems of the 70s were related to the Oil crisis and also excessive wage demands from unions.

The downturns of the late 80s related to a capitalism boom in the UK. The recession of 2008 related to subprime boom in the US.

Before membership, the UK was engaged in two world wars, rationing for almost 10 years after WW2, various economic downturns and maybe a brief period of growth during the 1960s before EU membership.

The collapse in traditional industries bar maybe fishing is related to cheap imports from the likes of China or collapse in demand for coal.

So, the UK before EU membership was in all probability a pretty miserable place with appalling environmental standards, poor working conditions and poor living standards. A treat for workers was a weeks holiday at a seaside resort, and travel to far and distant places which today is the norm would have been far removed for most people.

Without question most people are better off today in the UK, even those on the dole!

Strazdas

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Most of the downturns in the UK were unrelated to EU membership since they joined.

The problems of the 70s were related to the Oil crisis and also excessive wage demands from unions.

The downturns of the late 80s related to a capitalism boom in the UK. The recession of 2008 related to subprime boom in the US.

Before membership, the UK was engaged in two world wars, rationing for almost 10 years after WW2, various economic downturns and maybe a brief period of growth during the 1960s before EU membership.

The collapse in traditional industries barring maybe fishing is related to cheap imports from the likes of China or collapse in demand for coal.

So, the UK before EU membership was in all probability a pretty miserable place with appalling environmental standards, poor working conditions and poor living standards. A treat for workers was a weeks holiday at a seaside resort, and travel to far and distant places which today is the norm would have been far removed for most people.

Without question most people are better off today in the UK, even those on the dole!

If the EU was genuinely causing hardship and poverty and impacting on sovereignty, it would be on the verge of collapse and every country would want to leave.

The funny part is that the UK had dozens of opt outs, including very important ones like Schengen and the Eurozone, but even then were still complaining about how the EU was an autocratic dictatorship. The EU they've been hating on is a fantasy one they've created in their own minds.

briany

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Johnson on problems in ex-colonies: The problem is not that we were once in charge, but that we are not in charge any more... Consider Uganda, pearl of Africa, as an example of the British record. … the British planted coffee and cotton and tobacco, and they were broadly right... If left to their own devices, the natives would rely on nothing but the instant carbohydrate gratification of the plantain. You never saw a place so abounding in bananas: great green barrel-sized bunches, off to be turned into matooke. Though this dish (basically fried banana) was greatly relished by Idi Amin, the colonists correctly saw that the export market was limited... The best fate for Africa would be if the old colonial powers, or their citizens, scrambled once again in her direction; on the understanding that this time they will not be asked to feel guilty.

It's arguable that the colonists never left. They may have independence, but it's largely an illusion and many of the presidents and prime ministers down there are bought and paid for to sell their countries' resources short.

Sam Russell

prawnsambo wrote: »

Tired Gardener wrote: »

I agree with all of what you have said, apart from saying that there is no 'special agreement' between the UK and the USA. Because that is factual incorrect, a quick Google search will show that the 'SA' has been around since 1941.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement

The media in the UK are I believe to blame for a lot of the anti-EU lies that get thrown around, Banning Milk Chocolate, banning bendy bananas, etc. Sadly the UK's educational institution isn't aimed at equipping people with the tools to think critically. So they lap this up, while also living in some of the biggest wealth gaps in all of Europe. The richest region in Western Europe is London, 9 of the poorest regions are with in the UK... 6/7 of those are in the North of England. Then add in 10 years of austerity and seeing the quality of life go down.

Add in that the UK has only recently lost its Empire (1996/7), and a good number of people who were alive to vote in the 2016 referendum would have had a miss placed love of the Empire. From their perspective they have seen things being lost. We know he Empire was a horrific thing, but to some it was seen as a badge if pride.

It really wasn't a surprise that the UK voted to Leave, what is surprising is that the Remain vote was as high as it was.

Brexit is a beast birthed from many bastards. I also think that it is the wrestle with its own identity that the UK needs. The UK needs to shed off the old, and be able to play fairly with a group where it is an equal.

That's not quite the same thing as the so-called special relationship. Five Eyes is a signals intelligence co-operative that existed (as you say) since 1941. The special relationship is supposed to be a kind of entente cordiale between the USA and the UK. Supposedly making them allies as well as trade partners. The trade partnership has fallen away with the UK joining the EU and never amounted to much in any case and the alliance didn't hold up well during the Falklands War when the USA felt that their relationship with Argentina was more important.

I used the term 'Special Relationship' not 'Special Agreement'. There is a huge difference. I may have an agreement to buy a car from someone, but if that someone is my brother, then it is different as we both have to live with it if there is a problem. Not the same with a stranger.

The UK had an agreement with the USA during the 2nd WW which was call 'Lend Lease' where the USA sold munitions and supplies to the UK, and got payment after hostilities ended. This bankrupted the UK. They had an agreement on nuclear weapons, but the UK had to stop developing and buy USA trident. They had an agreement on computers, but the UK had to abandon development in favour of US computers. etc etc etc. Agreement ended up in buying American, or follow USA into war - but not the other way round. That is the basis of an agreement, that is true.

The UK lost its Empire in 1948 when India became independent. India was the Empire - the rest were just colonies. The colonies were lost to uprises and revolutions by native populations against the colonial power.

Ireland on the other hand visits the White House every year to celebrate St Patrick's Day, and holds the St Patrick's Day Parade in NY on St Patrick's Day every year - one of very few parades held on the actual day.

Most US presidents visit Ireland to help their re-election. Most US politicians like to emphasise any Irish heritage. Now that is a relationship.

An Ciarraioch

Verhofstadt, like the Taoiseach, advocating a flextension:

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1187032049443573760

murphaph

The comments sections of the right wing UK press went into overdrive this afternoon as news reports incorrectly stated that the trailer carrying those 39 poor unfortunates came in via Holyhead.

lawred2

Shelga wrote: »

Of the dozens of middle-aged men from the West Midlands I know who voted Brexit, a superiority complex, colonial complex, or whatever you’d like to call it, played a massive part.

These people simply think they are better than people from other countries. That’s the truth of it. No, they’re not going to come out and say that to a poll-taker, and no one is going to format a question like that in a survey anyway.

It's basically how my parents in law view their relationship with the rest of the world.

Even when clear evidence to the contrary is presented to them.

Strazdas

murphaph wrote: »

The comments sections of the right wing UK press went into overdrive this afternoon as news reports incorrectly stated that the trailer carrying those 39 poor unfortunates came in via Holyhead.

There's no proof Ireland is a soft underbelly into the UK. I've a suspicion Irish customs are even stricter than their UK counterparts.

Letwin_Larry

murphaph wrote: »

The comments sections of the right wing UK press went into overdrive this afternoon as news reports incorrectly stated that the trailer carrying those 39 poor unfortunates came in via Holyhead.

absolutely the route they claimed the truck made just made no sense whatsoever.
quite possible the driver had no idea what was in the trailer, and was simply contracted to travel to Essex and then deliver it to wherever.

some reportage comparing him with The Yorkshire Ripper and Harold Shipman are totally wrong imo.

Letwin_Larry

sondagefaux wrote: »

Apparently it first entered Britain via Holyhead.

the truck/tractor did but the trailer came over from Zeebrugge into Purfleet.
those poor people may well have been dead before he even arrived.
disgusting whatever, but the driver may be totally innocent.

prawnsambo

Letwin_Larry wrote: »

absolutely the route they claimed the truck made just made no sense whatsoever.
quite possible the driver had no idea what was in the trailer, and was simply contracted to travel to Essex and then deliver it to wherever.

some reportage comparing him with The Yorkshire Ripper and Harold Shipman are totally wrong imo.

Yeah, the shipping company usually has various subcontracted haulage companies to do the job once the container gets to port. Some of it is in-house in some countries and farmed out in others. It's quite possible it was the driver who reported it, otherwise how would anyone know?

black forest

These articles will probably come up more often.


https://twitter.com/fgabikay/status/1187019469408870400?s=21

Direct link to the full article.

https://www.fginsight.com/news/canada-stopped-trade-talks-after-liberal-no-deal-tariffs-removed-uk-leverage--96402


So as expected why should anybody look out for an FTA when most of the UK tariffs are at zero anyway? The sharks are patient and just resume circling.