Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

McGiver wrote: »

Campaigns? Demonstrations? Civil disobedience? Petitions? I don't see anything.

The Remain side did two marches. That just won't cut it if you're dealing with such a toxic regime.

I know the dissent options are somewhat limited by lockdown but...

There were plenty of marches pre-covid with hundreds of thousands in attendance of each. There have also been multiple campaigns.

Like I said, when a country is this centralised, there just isn't much point so people just gave up when Johnson won his majority in 2019.

BlitzKrieg

McGiver wrote: »

Campaigns? Demonstrations? Civil disobedience? Petitions? I don't see anything.

The Remain side did two marches. That just won't cut it if you're dealing with such a toxic regime.

I know the dissent options are somewhat limited by lockdown but...

There were a lot more then two. I dont think you can understand how unbelievably divided the country is unless you spend time there.

you could march and protest all you want in london, bristol or manchester and it wouldnt mean a thing because cities like that support you. The areas where brexit is strongest, no one marches, no one campaigns or argues.


I've been working in the UK for the last 11 years, my industry is overwhelmingly pro remain and i've been staying mostly in pro remain areas because that was where my work was, I've only met one person who was pro brexit and he was basically a kid who drank the sargon koolaid. But I did have to spend 3 months working in Bridgend on one job, a town that was pro brexit and I could see it on a base level, where in London you had pro remain grafitti and posters over the place, bridgend had the same but anti EU and pro Brexit. I thought it was so weird that my local chipper had a "F*ck off EU we want our fish" poster proudly hung up right outside it's door and I just needed to travel a short distance to cardiff to see that flip back to remain.

And thats the UK a country that despite it's large population and size everyone's notion of what the UK is ends at the border of their constituency.

the whole country is a reverse tardis.

Strazdas

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

There were plenty of marches pre-covid with hundreds of thousands in attendance of each. There have also been multiple campaigns.

Like I said, when a country is this centralised, there just isn't much point so people just gave up when Johnson won his majority in 2019.

In many countries, you would have seen far more in the way of protest than mere marches on a Saturday afternoon, maybe even as far as a general strike.

I guess in England though the far right control the press to an extraordinary degree and they made out that anyone opposed to Brexit was "undemocratic" and a "traitor" (real dictatorship stuff in other words).

RobMc59

McGiver wrote: »

This is truly 1984-esque. And (Bela)Russian-esque. Scary stuff. What is more scary is that there's no dissent in England, almost none at all.
Keep calm and carry on towards an authoritarian Britain.

I've just looked on the gov.uk brexit checker and if you are a business owner based in the EU who wants to purchase a first edition copy of 1984 from the UK it says you are unlikely to be able to do so.Which I'd say is deliciously ironic after reading your post.

ancapailldorcha

Strazdas wrote: »

In many countries, you would have seen far more in the way of protest than mere marches on a Saturday afternoon, maybe even as far as a general strike.

I guess in England though the far right control the press to an extraordinary degree and they made out that anyone opposed to Brexit was "undemocratic" and a "traitor" (real dictatorship stuff in other words).

People bussed in from all over the country for these marches. At the time there was a parliamentary stalemate which was resolved in 2019 when Johnson won the election. At that point, protest became pointless.

johnnyskeleton

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Like I said, when a country is this centralised, there just isn't much point so people just gave up when Johnson won his majority in 2019.

Also, it must be said, the remain side is an intellectual argument, but the brexit side is a passionate jingoistic call to arms. James O Brien quotes Yeates a lot, the worst are filled with passionate intensity while the best are wracked with doubt or the like.

Strazdas

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

People bussed in from all over the country for these marches. At the time there was a parliamentary stalemate which was resolved in 2019 when Johnson won the election. At that point, protest became pointless.

If the same process was unfolding in Ireland or France, there's no way the public would take it lying down. We could easily be into blockades or even general strike territory.

A near fascist press (if such a thing was to exist in either country) informing the public and protesters they were undemocratic or traitors for opposing the exit process would be laughed out of it.

demfad

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

There were plenty of marches pre-covid with hundreds of thousands in attendance of each. There have also been multiple campaigns.

Like I said, when a country is this centralised, there just isn't much point so people just gave up when Johnson won his majority in 2019.

Over 6 million signatures for a parliamentary petition too undo Brexit/another Brexit referendum...ignored.
Farage's disaster walk for Brexit got more coverage.

ancapailldorcha

Strazdas wrote: »

If the same process was unfolding in Ireland or France, there's no way the public would take it lying down. We could easily be into blockades or even general strike territory.

A near fascist press (if such a thing was to exist in either country) informing the public and protesters they were undemocratic or traitors for opposing the exit process would be laughed out of it.

Ok, let's go piece by piece with this.

First of all, this isn't Ireland or France. It's the UK. This country's politics and conventions have evolved over a period of nearly a thousand years in a very specific manner for all sorts of cultural, geographical and historic reasons. In the history of England, the accountability of the sovereign was established and enshrined very early on by European standards in the Magna Carta signed at Runnymede in 1215. While the document was disregarded in the years to come, it did away with the idea of the executive being unaccountable.

During the English Civil War of the mid-seventeenth century, the principle of Parliamentary primacy was established and accepted. From then on, Parliament was, and is viewed as the chief power of this land. The term "mother of Parliaments", a phrase used by John Bright is a reference to England's long history of Parliamentarianism.

The long term effect of this is that whereas other European states went through reigns of despots from Royal Houses such as Bourbon, Habsburg, Trastamara, Hohenzollern, Romanov, Jagiellon, etc, in England Parliament assumed this role. The fact that Parliament was made up of so many people made absolutist rule such as that experienced in many European states impossible. England, therefore enjoyed largely stable and sensible government relative to her European neighbours. Even the glorious revolution of 1688 consisted of not much more than a Dutchman sailing up the Thames. Domestic English politics was largely stable from the end of the civil war onwards. I'm not trying to assert that there are no stains or sins in English history, just that its Parliamentary democracy fostered stable and pragmatic government for centuries.

The point I am trying to make with all this is that in this country, Parliament is the de facto sovereign. It's a system that has historically worked quite well for the British people until quite recently when cracks began to appear such as the drop in political party membership, the appearance of influential parties outside the Labour and Conservative parties and a generally more pluralistic politics becoming the norm. Parliament wields supreme authority in this country and acts as it sees fit. It's kept in check by the courts, convention, the press, etc but ultimately Parliament is where power in the United Kingdom resides, specifically the lower house, the House of Commons. It's only recently that people are asking serious questions about how this system works given that it's worked relatively well for centuries. I agree that there needs to be serious reform, particularly on voting but I also respect this nation's history and that many are attached to the status quo for reasons aside from their being privileged. 

I don't know a great deal about the French constitution or how it may be amended. I did look it up on Wikipedia and it appears that they have a constitution which may be amended:

The Constitution also sets out methods for its own amendment: a referendum (article 11) or a Parliamentary process with Presidential consent. The normal procedure of constitutional amendment is that the amendment must be adopted in identical terms by both houses of Parliament and then must be adopted by a simple majority in a referendum or by a three-fifths supermajority of the French Congress, a joint session of both houses of Parliament (article 89).

The French also tend to be much more sceptical and belligerent than the English. For instance, the French have a much higher distrust of their government and of vaccines. They also seem to be much more willing to down tools and take to the streets. I freely admit that I'm talking about a subject I am not well versed in. The point I wanted to make is that the French have a different constitutional settlement and a different political culture. The UK also has a series of trusted institutions, none more so than  the NHS. I don't know if this is a feature of French politics. 

Brexit is essentially a sweeping constitutional change which was only defined 4.5 years after it was sanctioned by the public after the initial and only referendum. The Irish constitution would have prevented this for obvious reasons. Ireland's PR system also disincentivises the sort of divisive politics that would impel a prime ministerial candidate to make such a radical promise unfettered. It also means that he'd have to win a sizeable mandate from the people or form a coalition with a similarly minded party in the Dail. Cameron won a little over 40% of the vote in 2015. Different system, different politics and different checks & balances.

Which takes us to your claim of the UK having a "near fascist press". I disagree. While it's patently obvious that the press in this country is pliant and supportive when the government is a right wing government trending ever further to the right, these newspapers and their owners do not account for the entirety of the British press. The Economist, the Financial Times, and the Guardian are three examples of alternative outlets which have been criticising HM government and Brexit for years. There are also online outfits such as the Huffington Post. You could argue that the press here is corrupt, ineffective and unfit for purpose. I'd agree for the most part. The Economist costs me hundreds of pounds a year to read. The FT is even more expensive and the Guardian have been panhandling for years. If people want better media, they'll either have to pay for it or settle for ad-funded nonsense. 

I don't think the Irish have the political culture for the press to be able to convince people that anyone who complained about the result of a referendum was a traitor or undemocratic. My own albeit limited experience of Irish referenda is that they're voted on, the results discerned and announced and then people carry on as they were. National referenda are very much anachronistic to British politics so its no surprise that in such a partisan, acrimonious atmosphere, the division has worsened. There are lessons that could be imported from the UK's Irish and continental neighbours but that seems sadly unlikely.

RobMc59

I understand some of my posts are unpopular on this thread but so far today, Britain was about to capitulate during the blitz and now is being called a fascist country.

johnnyskeleton

If we are going to delve into the British view of parliamentary democracy, I would mention a few things:

1) the Lord Protector of the Realm, one of the first modern dictators, dismissed parliament because they didnt agree with him, and is today held up as some kind of bizzare example of democracy;

2) Brexit was voted for to ensure that the Westminster parliament had asbolute sovereignty, except when parliament disagreed with parliament, in which case parliament was a traitor to parliament;

3) the phrase "mother of all parliaments" is a gradeoise but false claim that Westminster has greater heritage than other democracies. Its like Guinness saying that James Gate is the home of stout or the like.

Not saying the British dont love democracy. Im just saying I question whether they know what it is or not. In any event, they seem happy with what has happened and it is as good an expression of the will of the people as any I suppose.

ancapailldorcha

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

If we are going to delve into the British view of parliamentary democracy, I would mention a few things:

1) the Lord Protector of the Realm, one of the first modern dictators, dismissed parliament because they didnt agree with him, and is today held up as some kind of bizzare example of democracy;

2) Brexit was voted for to ensure that the Westminster parliament had asbolute sovereignty, except when parliament disagreed with parliament, in which case parliament was a traitor to parliament;

3) the phrase "mother of all parliaments" is a gradeoise but false claim that Westminster has greater heritage than other democracies. Its like Guinness saying that James Gate is the home of stout or the like.

Not saying the British dont love democracy. Im just saying I question whether they know what it is or not. In any event, they seem happy with what has happened and it is as good an expression of the will of the people as any I suppose.

I wasn't trying to claim that Britain's democracy isn't the best or most robust, just that it's different from and older than that in most countries.

The British have a particular flavour of democracy that is heavily centralised and has no role for the citizen beyond the regular casting of ballots in elections.

On your points:

1. I've not seen or heard anyone here talk about Cromwell as any sort of democrat. It's a subject I personally need to learn more about but I don't think he's ever really discussed here outside of circles of people who are interested in history.

2. Brexit has turned the constitution here on its head. Johnson tried to prorogue Parliament when it didn't play ball.

3. I was using that quote to demonstrate how old Britain's system is as opposed to making some sort of argument for English Parliamentary exceptionalism.

BlitzKrieg

RobMc59 wrote: »

I understand some of my posts are unpopular on this thread but so far today, Britain was about to capitulate during the blitz and now is being called a fascist country.

Yeah but both of those points have been called out by other posters and challenged and discussed.

(see the massive post by ancapailldorcha above)

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Please report posts and don't accuse people of trolling on thread please. A post has been deleted.

Sam Russell

RobMc59 wrote: »

I understand some of my posts are unpopular on this thread but so far today, Britain was about to capitulate during the blitz and now is being called a fascist country.

You are referring to my post where someone I knew said that the V2s were affecting morale in London and that made London 'close to collapse. That was the opinion of one person that lived throughout WW II in London and was subject to the blitz. I did not say Britain was about to collapse or capitulate.

It was an anecdote, and you have misrepresented the point I was making, which was that the blitz was that it was dreadful. No-one who went through the blitz would look back on it as anything but horrific.

You find that people who have lived through any major trauma do not romanticise it in any way. They do not wish to re-live the experience.

The people who refer to the 'blitz spirit' are trivialising it - for what?

Strazdas

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

If we are going to delve into the British view of parliamentary democracy, I would mention a few things:

1) the Lord Protector of the Realm, one of the first modern dictators, dismissed parliament because they didnt agree with him, and is today held up as some kind of bizzare example of democracy;

2) Brexit was voted for to ensure that the Westminster parliament had asbolute sovereignty, except when parliament disagreed with parliament, in which case parliament was a traitor to parliament;

3) the phrase "mother of all parliaments" is a gradeoise but false claim that Westminster has greater heritage than other democracies. Its like Guinness saying that James Gate is the home of stout or the like.

Not saying the British dont love democracy. Im just saying I question whether they know what it is or not. In any event, they seem happy with what has happened and it is as good an expression of the will of the people as any I suppose.

It's debatable if the UK even had a democracy prior to 1918. Only 8m men and zero women out of a population of 43m had the vote prior to that. Incredibly, most of the 5m men who fought in WW1 had no legal right to vote at the time, as they were from poorer backgrounds.

Rain Ascending

reslfj wrote: »

Sure, 68% is a huge figure, but it's in volume and not in value.


Lars

Agreed. And I also agree with Irish Praetorian that Covid may also be having an negative effect, contributing to the figures above.

It's hard to work out what the precise impact on the UK economy of all of this is. For example, as you say, it's by volume rather than value or (more interestingly) added value. For example, what kind of shipments are or are not getting through? You can make arguments either way -- blocked goods could be groupage of stuff from redistribution hubs in the UK (low-added value) or highly-specialized UK-manufactured goods going to multiple customers (high-added value).

The real point is, the kind of figures being suggested, a 68% reduction in good exports on Ro-Ro, point to a significant impact on the UK economy. If I were in either the trade or treasury departments in the UK government, I'd be all over these numbers like a rash, trying to assess what is going on, as quickly as possible. Instead, government spokespersons are taking their lead from the Cabint-office-level spokeperson, building a narrative of "problem, what problem?":
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/07/government-hits-back-claims-brexit-stifling-exports-eu

Frankly, they've been lucky so far on two points: (a) Exporter have acted very rationally, by holding back trucks that won't make it though customs. (b) Business has kept imports up by, as the RHA talks about, bringing empty trucks back from the EU. The result is that there has been little port congestion and system failures due to critial imports getting snarled up hasn't happened -- that was one of my big fears and it hasn't come to pass.

But by not understanding what's going on and ignoring the pointers to big economic damage on the export side, is foolhardy in extreme. It feels as if the UK government's objective is to survive the Sunday newspaper news-cycle, ignoring that next Sunday is just a week away...

RobMc59

Sam Russell wrote: »

You are referring to my post where someone I knew said that the V2s were affecting morale in London and that made London 'close to collapse. That was the opinion of one person that lived throughout WW II in London and was subject to the blitz. I did not say Britain was about to collapse or capitulate.

It was an anecdote, and you have misrepresented the point I was making, which was that the blitz was that it was dreadful. No-one who went through the blitz would look back on it as anything but horrific.

You find that people who have lived through any major trauma do not romanticise it in any way. They do not wish to re-live the experience.

The people who refer to the 'blitz spirit' are trivialising it - for what?

Sam,I believe we've clashed before about British wartime events/accounts.I accept you have an interest in this subject and don't question your integrity for a second.I admit the later comments(not by you)about the UK being a fascist country probably incensed me sufficiently to post yesterday.
I'm also interested in British military history and accept you can't win 'em all,Dunkirk for example was a military defeat,the British celebrating so many of our troops escaping there to fight another day is frequently mistakenly seen as British arrogance and delusion here on boards.Interestingly,back in the late 80s I spoke to an Irish soldier who served in the BA and was at Dunkirk.He was just happy so many of them escaped from there.
Regarding the UK being a fascist country(which you have never claimed to the best of my knowledge).As a young lad,I holidayed in Spain in the late 60s and early 70s-now that was fascism!Lovely,unspoilt place back then(still is in parts)I had never seen a real machine gun back then,the sight of the Spanish police dressed in exact replica uniforms of German ww2 soldiers,even down to those strange trousers with the sides sticking out and German style machine guns,the only difference being the strange hats I can only describe as similar to a matadors hat.
The account i posted told to me by my 99 year old mother is as she told me,I was unaware about German bombers dropping mines into the river but searched it and they did.She has never mentioned V2s but has mentioned V1s (doodlebug) she says you could hear the engine but when the noise stopped you knew it was about to hit the ground.
This next bit isn't aimed at you Sam,some may say what has any of that got to do with brexit?Which may be true but the world did exist before the EU and Britain was a beacon during ww2 for the free people of Europe escaping the nazis.
Edit.Ive attached a link about the German attacks on this area during ww2.

"Liverpool Blitz - Wikipedia" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_Blitz

Peregrinus

Rain Ascending wrote: »

Frankly, they've been lucky so far on two points: (a) Exporter have acted very rationally, by holding back trucks that won't make it though customs. (b) Business has kept imports up by, as the RHA talks about, bringing empty trucks back from the EU. The result is that there has been little port congestion and system failures due to critial imports getting snarled up hasn't happened -- that was one of my big fears and it hasn't come to pass.

It hasn't come to pass, but so what? The reason port congestion would be a Bad Thing is because it would impeded goods passing through the ports, and so reduce trade, and earnings, and employment. We don't have port congestion but the reason for this is, in fact, that goods aren't passing through ports because they are impeded by other factors - the inability of traders to prepare or complete the required documentation or otherwise comply with new requirements; the refusal by carriers to carry the goods; the withdrawal of services by shipper, etc. These are all Bad Things for precisely the same reason that port congestion would be a Bad Thing; they mean fewer goods passing through the ports, with consequent impact on earnings, employment, etc.

You're quite right that it's necessary to get a handle on this, but we're going to have to wait. The TCA has only been in operation for a little over a month - and, in fact, only partly in operation. Things like the 68%-by-volume reduction are very crude measures, and really just pointers to the picture that is likely to emerge in time. Really solid figures are, I think, prepared quarterly. In any event, the UK has deferred implementing TCA controls on goods coming into the UK (because, surprise surprise, they turn out to be wholly unprepared to operate the Canada-style rules they have been demanding for the past year) so we won't really know the full picture until we have trade figures for Q3 of 2021, which presumably won't happen until well into Q4. In the meantime we'll get a general picture from the complaints and representations of trade bodies and from newspaper reports of, e.g., export-oriented SMEs contracting or folding.

McGiver

Strazdas wrote:

In many countries, you would have seen far more in the way of protest than mere marches on a Saturday afternoon, maybe even as far as a general strike.

That was exactly my point. By "no dissent" I didn't mean no dissent. I meant no degree of dissent you would expect somewhere else, e.g. in France.

If something so divisive and destructive was put in place by <45% of the votes you can bet that France would have barricades, strikes, and potentially disobedience and even riots or cars burning.

UK needs another version Poll Tax Riots but instead this time they are slowly sleepwalking into fascism.

dogbert27

Sam Russell wrote: »

You equate Brexit with suffering - not unicorns and the sunny uplands that were promised. I do not think that the suffering you predict will come on gradually or slowly, but rapidly. Ask the fishermen or the cheese exporter, or the ones told by the government agency to set up business in the EU.

The simplicity of life within the SM and CU meant you did not need any extra paperwork to do business with Antwerp or Berlin, or Rome, you just did it. No customs paperwork, no SPS inspections - just invoice and ship.

Who would have thought that leaving the SM and CU would mean that you would need to produce proof you satisfied SM requirements and made customs entries with proper invoices, declarations of customs codes and weights? Why did they not tell everyone? Who knew?

Well, ask Gove, and Raab (mind you he did not know much at all) or Davis.

100,000 pigs still not sold this year and who is to blame......?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9234807/As-100-000-pigs-languish-limbo-no-wonder-one-six-farmers-threatening-sell-up.html

Yep the Dutch, not Brexit. :rolleyes:

"The pork industry’s ire is aimed squarely at the Dutch authorities, whose po-faced intransigence when enforcing the pettiest EU customs and health regulations can make the French seem almost obliging by comparison."

This is the British attitude that people here are annoyed about. They can't admit this is their own fault.

We would be a great independent sovereign country if other countries stopped enforcing their rules on us!!

Peregrinus

dogbert27 wrote: »

. . . .
We would be a great independent sovereign country if other countries stopped enforcing the rules we demanded be enforced on us!!

Fixed that for you.

Zubeneschamali

dogbert27 wrote: »

This is the British attitude

In fairness, you are quoting the Daily Mail, so this is not so much
a British attitude as a pack of lies written to sell a rag to the worst people in Britain.

Sam Russell

RobMc59 wrote: »

Sam,I believe we've clashed before about British wartime events/accounts.I accept you have an interest in this subject and don't question your integrity for a second.I admit the later comments(not by you)about the UK being a fascist country probably incensed me sufficiently to post yesterday.
I'm also interested in British military history and accept you can't win 'em all,Dunkirk for example was a military defeat,the British celebrating so many of our troops escaping there to fight another day is frequently mistakenly seen as British arrogance and delusion here on boards.Interestingly,back in the late 80s I spoke to an Irish soldier who served in the BA and was at Dunkirk.He was just happy so many of them escaped from there.
Regarding the UK being a fascist country(which you have never claimed to the best of my knowledge).As a young lad,I holidayed in Spain in the late 60s and early 70s-now that was fascism!Lovely,unspoilt place back then(still is in parts)I had never seen a real machine gun back then,the sight of the Spanish police dressed in exact replica uniforms of German ww2 soldiers,even down to those strange trousers with the sides sticking out and German style machine guns,the only difference being the strange hats I can only describe as similar to a matadors hat.
The account i posted told to me by my 99 year old mother is as she told me,I was unaware about German bombers dropping mines into the river but searched it and they did.She has never mentioned V2s but has mentioned V1s (doodlebug) she says you could hear the engine but when the noise stopped you knew it was about to hit the ground.
This next bit isn't aimed at you Sam,some may say what has any of that got to do with brexit?Which may be true but the world did exist before the EU and Britain was a beacon during ww2 for the free people of Europe escaping the nazis.
Edit.Ive attached a link about the German attacks on this area during ww2.

"Liverpool Blitz - Wikipedia" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_Blitz

The comments I was making re the blitz were about a person who lived through it, and said how awful it was, and hearing these gob****es saying the blitz was somehow a good thing. The really bad aspect of it was the V2. The V1 was very bad - you heard the dull drone and when it stopped, the explosion followed a few seconds later as the doodlebug dropped out of the sky. With the V2, there was no sound, just an explosion. [Well, the two year old daughter of the person I am referring to used to go into hysterical screaming as she could hear the V2 coming]. The V2 killed London's morale - it was a terror weapon.

The 'blitz spirit' should be considered on a par with the 'sniper alley' in Sarajevo during that civil strife. There is no way war should be considered a 'good thing' at any level, and should never be glorified.

Fascism is war without the shooting - look at Putin's Russia.

RobMc59

RobMc59 wrote: »

I understand some of my posts are unpopular on this thread but so far today, Britain was about to capitulate during the blitz and now is being called a fascist country.

Are these things mutually exclusive? (Never mind veracity of the latter ideal, it's absolutely possible for both of these things to be true, so reductio ad absurdum doesn't appy?)

Zubeneschamali

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In fairness, you are quoting the Daily Mail, so this is not so much
a British attitude as a pack of lies written to sell a rag to the worst people in Britain.

Fundamentally I agree - however do note that it is one of the most read rags in the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation

It is not a parody to all whom consume it.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

Fundamentally I agree - however do note that it is one of the most read rags in the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation

It is not a parody to all whom consume it.

It is a parody - who consumes the parody is irrelevant - it is still a parody.

Just because you do not get a funny joke, does not stop it being a funny joke.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is a parody - who consumes the parody is irrelevant - it is still a parody.

Just because you do not get a funny joke, does not stop it being a funny joke.

Fair, "it is not seen as a parody" by all consumers probably reflects my opinion on it better and reads more accurately.

The point being that dismissing UK red-tops as being "only red-tops" completely misses the influence they wield on UK public opinion. It is not a good idea to write them off as noise and not reflective of opinions of some % of their readers.

RobMc59

Sam Russell wrote: »

The comments I was making re the blitz were about a person who lived through it, and said how awful it was, and hearing these gob****es saying the blitz was somehow a good thing. The really bad aspect of it was the V2. The V1 was very bad - you heard the dull drone and when it stopped, the explosion followed a few seconds later as the doodlebug dropped out of the sky. With the V2, there was no sound, just an explosion. [Well, the two year old daughter of the person I am referring to used to go into hysterical screaming as she could hear the V2 coming]. The V2 killed London's morale - it was a terror weapon.

The 'blitz spirit' should be considered on a par with the 'sniper alley' in Sarajevo during that civil strife. There is no way war should be considered a 'good thing' at any level, and should never be glorified.

Fascism is war without the shooting - look at Putin's Russia.

I have never met anyone who has ever mentioned 'blitz spirit' or thought any of it was a good thing. They just got on with it because they had to.
Edit:Your comment regarding the V2 shows just how ahead of their time Germany was back then with what was essentially the first ballistic missile,not to mention their jet fighters.

redcup342

Some Issues I've seen here in Germany directly related to Brexit.

German Companies are laying off people working remotely in the UK, IR35 came into force, Contractors are being forced to pay the same rates as Permanent employees. They can't easily move to Germany now either due to the whole work permit thing.

Double Divorce now required, situation unclear with German Pensions as a UK Divorce is no longer covered by EU Rules.

UK Car hire excess companies and other insurance forms cancelled policies as they are no longer allowed to operate in the EU.

It's no longer possible to easily move back to the UK and maintain Social Security Entitlements, if you leave you essentially break your contributions which has implications in multiple countries (Germany/NL etc)

UK Citizens are essentially stuck wherever they are, for example a friend of mine is a British Citizen, wants to go and work in spain for 6 months.

The whole process costs 5k to sort out everything for Spain and if he leaves NL he will lose residency meaning he'll lose all rights that had due to having Dutch residency pre Jan 1st 2021, so he can't do it really.

Whatever about Trade and so on, the free movement thing is a real shot in the balls, its starting to affect peoples lives big time.

If you are an EU (Non Irish) Citizen you only lost the UK as an option, the UK lost everywhere else as an option.

It will be interesting to see what happens in a years time, the UK Government was blessed with COVID it's easy to blame everything on that and use it as a distraction.