General British politics discussion thread

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305145#Comment_122305145

if the Americans and the EU had been a bit more clever I doubt brexit would have happened, quite rightly the incompetence of the migrant crises made it look like something youd want to row away from.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305197#Comment_122305197

Well if it wasn't for idiots being "sick of experts" they would have known that Brexit was going to do nothing to stop the inflow of refugees and was most likely going to make it a harder problem to tackle.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305204#Comment_122305204

thats not how people think though, "anything but the present" looks like a good alternative in such a scenario, if the Americans were insistent on toppling everything that moved and the EU made a good attempt at looking impotent, tough tits there are consequences

pixelburp

What more could the EU have possibly done to stem an outcome that was always coming? The UK was given exception after exception to placate the constant thread of euroscepticism that existed from the moment they joined the bloc. How do you counter 40+ years of institutionalised nonsense about helmets for trapeze artists, "2 world wars and one world cup" & the general resting xenophobia? You can't and no amount of "experts" were going to be able to counter the ludicrous easy answers Farage & co. were peddling to those already saturated with mythology about Britain's place in the world.

We in the EU did our best to work with the UK but eventually the English's own sense of over-inflated value pushed them into continued economic seppuku. There's only so much we could have done; we literally gave them as much legal exceptions as could be reasonably given.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305236#Comment_122305236

No one has got a viable solution for the migrant crisis, a crisis which can only get worse. Coupled to this is the inability of people to distinguish between refugees and the huge number of people who have come in on work visa to do work that otherwise would go undone. If the media is feeding the line that they are all the same then who can blame the public for falling for the narrative that there is a huge migrant problem.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305281#Comment_122305281

if you can row a dingy from france to england or sneak in the back of a truck and not sent back its just a lack of common sense

swampgas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305145#Comment_122305145

There's an element (perhaps) that the press were pushing against an open door. The anti-european narrative meshed with British exceptionalism, so there was very little push back, even (in my own limited experience) among the more educated. It was just too easy to accept that the funny Europeans didn't really know what they were doing.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305273#Comment_122305273

The desire to extricate themselves from EU membership amongst certain quarters in Britain has always been a confusing one. Britain had the best of both worlds with regards to their participation, a one foot in and one foot out situation that saw them get all of the benefit and less of the hassle.

So much so that the anti EU element over in Britain had to resort to multiple lies, like bendy bananas, in order to get people onside.

It's difficult to imagine that there's anyone over there, apart from the most stupid of the stupid, that can be happy with the way things have turned out.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305273#Comment_122305273

The ultimate problem was that after the 1975 confirmatory referendum, the remain side disbanded while the leave side got more and more organised over time. The 1992 Maastricht treaty was the real point that Euroscepticism that we know it now in the UK came into being with several people including Farage and Baker becoming radicalised at this point. Fun fact: One David Davis was responsible for whipping MPs into supporting the leglislation for that treaty.

Nobody here ever made a positive argument for the EU or membership of it. I was living in Brighton & Hove at the time and working in research. Most people voted remain but only after issuing the almost obligatory confirmation that "The EU needs reform". Specific details were never offered, nor did I ask for them.

The real problem was Theresa May's approach of firing the starting pistol and then deciding on tactics (not strategy), appointing Brexiters like Johnson and Davis to key positions but defanging them, not setting out a definitive vision for what she wanted and not taking the time to understand issues like Northern Ireland until it was much too late.

From my limited interactions with BAME people, I think the Brits are a lot less xenophobic than many countries. That said, I've spent my entire time here in cities so there may be some confirmation bias at play.

I don't think anything is going to stop populism except for tackling underlying economic issues. I doubt Starmer is that capable but he's a serious person and for now, that's enough.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305363#Comment_122305363

It's difficult to imagine that there's anyone over there, apart from the most stupid of the stupid, that can be happy with the way things have turned out.

And those who have made money outta this: don't forget the likes of Reese-Mogg (albeit his father) have openly discussed the idea of "disaster capitalism". Let's not forget the swathe of already wealthy people who saw Brexit as an opportunity to make even more money.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305382#Comment_122305382

Nobody here ever made a positive argument for the EU or membership of it. I was living in Brighton & Hove at the time and working in research. Most people voted remain but only after issuing the almost obligatory confirmation that "The EU needs reform". Specific details were never offered, nor did I ask for them.

And you had the farce of places like Cornwall who benefited from the EU to the tune of hundreds of millions, yet turned out to be a county with one of the larger voters for Brexit; money that has to this day, yet to be replaced.

I'd only partially agree with the other bit: I'd say there were more positive narratives spun but as you know yourself the media landscape and zeitgeist had been in the thrall of a right-wing, counter narrative that the EU were 'dem crazy foreigners trying to take over Britain. Say what you will about Farage - and I would, cos he's a c*nt - but like Trump he tapped into the emotionality of the issue and reduced the topic to the most simplistic and seductive path. Christ I'm even a little convinced trends like "Cool Britannia" kinda contributed to this idea of Britain (England) as something distinct and separate.

From my limited interactions with BAME people, I think the Brits are a lot less xenophobic than many countries. That said, I've spent my entire time here in cities so there may be some confirmation bias at play.

Think you nailed the important caveat there: urban centres trend more liberal than rural; it's another country but you'll look to how the strongest anti-immigration sentiment in the US comes from flyover states with almost zero diversity or inward migration. I'd stick my neck out to say you'd see similar polls in the UK on migration.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305412#Comment_122305412

Nobody voted to leave the EU for economic benefits. The stuff about trade deal was what the Tory right thought was important but the general public couldn't care less. Anybody coming out saying that we need more trade with China and India very quickly and clearly showed that they were just regurgitating talking points from Hannan and Farage. The Conservatives are only looking at electoral oblivion now because living standards tanked harder than a decade ago when they began austerity.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305382#Comment_122305382

If you think the cities are xenophobic, wait till you meet the county set. Racist would be to kind for most of them. They spent good money to get away from the Blacks.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305439#Comment_122305439

You might want to read my post again.

Tony EH

@pixelburp

And those who have made money outta this: don't forget the likes of
Reese-Mogg (albeit his father) have openly discussed the idea of
"disaster capitalism". Let's not forget the swathe of already wealthy
people who saw Brexit as an opportunity to make even more money.

Oh those bastards will make out like bandits for sure. But I was considering more the voting public, who are the ones most impacted by the decision.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305382#Comment_122305382

what you are saying though gets covered up in other things, what do you think "moving to a nice area" means or looking for "good schools" actually means. there is going to be a large dose of not necessarily "xenophobia" but sorting potential contacts or who you intereact with by class, a lot of parents wont want little Tarquin mixing in a classroom that is half black/islamic (not judging), if you have the cash for private fees or living in a "good area" its a rational choice

PommieBast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122304868#Comment_122304868

Those two have their own YouTube channel, https://www.youtube.com/%40restispolitics , which I watch a lot these days. They've uploaded at least some of the Channel 4 specials.

PommieBast

@pixelburp

And those who have made money outta this: don't forget the likes of
Reese-Mogg (albeit his father) have openly discussed the idea of
"disaster capitalism". Let's not forget the swathe of already wealthy
people who saw Brexit as an opportunity to make even more money.

There are suspicions it is about getting rid of regulations rather than adding to their piles of wedge. London is called the Laundromat for a reason..

swampgas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305565#Comment_122305565

Or preventing new regulations interfering with the dirty money business.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305574#Comment_122305574

The reason why the referendum was called in the first place. Cameron didn't get his exemptions from the new banking regs so he had no choice but to follow through on his threats to call a referendum.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305664#Comment_122305664

It wasn't. He called the referendum because he was expecting to be in coalition with the Lib Dems who would rightfully have vetoed it. The initial promise was to placate the Tory hard right with the expectation that it would never happen.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305688#Comment_122305688

He went with his wish list to Brussels and came back with nothing. One of his wishes was exemption to the coming banking regs.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305706#Comment_122305706

He asked for almost nothing and got it all. There's nothing in the Wiki about it. Do you have a source?

swampgas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305717#Comment_122305717

I think Brexit is a little like World War 1, in that there are many, many factors that triggered it.

Certainly Cameron thinking that offering a referendum (that he might not have to implement) to keep UKIP (or whatever faction it was) off his back is plausible, but Arron Banks and others were also heavily involved and their motivations for wanting Brexit are a lot murkier.

I was reading though this article from 2021 earlier:

https://taxjustice.net/2021/07/02/what-does-brexit-mean-for-tax-havens-and-the-city-of-london/

It describes, among other things, the constant pressure and lobbying from certain vested interests to push for deregulation, and it seems plausible to me that Brexit would have been seen as desirable by those interests.

And it ties up with the UK's role in money laundering, which is huge, and not exactly a secret - the FT did a film about it a few years back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyk12Wf_TeQ

Ultimately, Cameron may have been a pawn in a bigger game along with a lot of other people.

Can we say for sure that possible EU banking regulation was the reason for Brexit? Absolutely not. But was it a significant factor? I'd be inclined to think it was.

rock22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305717#Comment_122305717

Well there was TV news items at the time showing Cameron leaving a building in Brussels having had his requests rejected. I am not sure i can link to that now though.

Edit.. Actually it might have been more of a mixed bag.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-delighted-with-eu-talks-despite-warning-that-union-s-values-are-nonnegotiable-10346885.html

I do think though that even if he won the referndum and the agreed for changes werre delivered, it would still mark a slow exit from the EU rather than the actual rapid exit we got.

It was the UK position always to oppose ever closer integration in the EU. What they got was a partial exemption for the UK which ultimately would have seen the EU grow stronger and closer and the UK become , essentially, an associated member. Looking back, it is crazy that other member states actually agreed to this at the time .

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305880#Comment_122305880

I don't see it. As far as I can tell, it was never brought up by Cameron in 2015.

The financial sector might like deregulation but not at the cost of access to the EU's market which is the cost of Brexit. Paris exceeded London as Europe's top financial hub for a while which is crazy when you think about it.

I think the causes of Brexit are nowhere near as nuanced and complex as for the first world war. It was a combination of a migration crisis, austerity, stagnating loving standards, the rise of populism with David Cameron in the role of Gavrilo Princip.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305996#Comment_122305996

"Stagnating loving standards" is probably pretty accurate.

I do remember Cameron going to the EU with some "deal" full of special exemptions for the UK that every expert said was doomed to fail and probably purposely so. I don't remember it being about banking though but rather a number of things.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122306070#Comment_122306070

It was always a pointless exercise. Croatia has blue passports. Cameron could easily have gotten that at no political cost and some benefit.

Banking was nothing to do with it.

rock22

@breezy1985 "I do remember Cameron going to the EU with some "deal" full of special exemptions for the UK that every expert said was doomed to fail and probably purposely so. I don't remember it being about banking though but rather a number of things."

The main points seemed to be around sovereignty (i.e. exception from closer union), welfare for migrants( essentially limiting benefits to EU migrants. this had nothing to do with refugee policy), equality for sterling ( didn't happen and also forced EU regulations would apply in London), and that old standard, reducing red tape. ( I think there must be more regulation around the removal of red tape than any other issue!)

A good summary from the bbc here

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105

and a different take, from later in the year , from Independent

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-delighted-with-eu-talks-despite-warning-that-union-s-values-are-nonnegotiable-10346885.html

Interestingly, his time at the council meeting was curtailed because the southern countries, and Italy in particular wanted to discuss the illegal migrants in the Mediterranean. Cameron made it clear that yhe UK opposed any burden sharing of illegal migrants.

Podge_irl

The "negotiation" was part of the Brexit referendum process, not to avoid it.

swampgas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122305996#Comment_122305996

"As far as I can tell, it was never brought up by Cameron in 2015"

This is true, but I was assuming that this was something they were never going to say out loud. "We need to protect our ability to keep wealthy people's money away from the UK taxman in offshore tax havens" (something Cameron's own family have done) and "We need to maintain our ability to launder money efficiently" were hardly goals to be admitted publicly.

Anyhow, it's very speculative on my part, so not really worth pursuing, as my evidence for it is circumstantial and far from solid.

As for the WW1 comparison, yes, that might have been a bit of a reach 🙂