Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

embraer170

Anne Widdicombe has done some stage acting so her MEP performance at the Parliament shouldn't come as a huge surprise. She seems to have led an interesting life. One is also left wondering wonder how someone who read politics at Oxford comes out at the far end of the political spectrum.

tubercolossus

View wrote: »

No it is not.

My point was that a bonkers idea can find traction and a population can get swept up in it.

Yes, and that obviously is the case with Brexit. But not with Ireland's independence.

BonnieSituation

View wrote: »

No it is not.

My point was that a bonkers idea can find traction and a population can get swept up in it. History is frequently determined by bonkers ideas sweeping a population.

Like it or not, if any of our political parties today stood on the electoral platform of the parties of a hundred years ago, they would face electoral annihilation in today’s Republic and their platform would be openly ridiculed as being crazy. The population of today’s Republic would be no more likely to vote for such an isolationist agrarian platform than unionists were back then.

Today's republic wouldn't exist but for those "bonkers" ideas a century ago.

eire4

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Today's republic wouldn't exist but for those "bonkers" ideas a century ago.

And as imperfect to say the least our country is we are so much better off for that.

Strazdas

View wrote: »

That is basically what Ireland decided to do approx a hundred+ years ago when we were gung-ho to leave the U.K. & the Empire and become an isolated agrarian society.

Unsurprisingly the parts of Ireland - ie the NE - that were more industrial/less agrarian were hostile to that idea.

Never underestimate the possibility of a bonkers idea gaining traction.

Ireland wasn't invaded by the EEC in 1973. It applied to join and even held a referendum on it (unlike the British) before the entry into the market.

BonnieSituation

eire4 wrote: »

And as imperfect to say the least our country is we are so much better off for that.

Couldn't agree more. It's just a shame that 1.8m of our fellow Irish men and women have to be a control group.

breezy1985

View wrote: »

No it is not.

My point was that a bonkers idea can find traction and a population can get swept up in it. History is frequently determined by bonkers ideas sweeping a population.

Like it or not, if any of our political parties today stood on the electoral platform of the parties of a hundred years ago, they would face electoral annihilation in today’s Republic and their platform would be openly ridiculed as being crazy. The population of today’s Republic would be no more likely to vote for such an isolationist agrarian platform than unionists were back then.

Like many young nations it took Ireland a long time to go from being a sweatshop to a functional progressive country but I think Irish independence was very much proven to be the right thing in the long run.

The population of today's republic would rightly not vote for a "isolationist agrarian platform" because we are no longer an agrarian society and it would be a huge step back so that comment is just stupid.
I would say much like the Scottish we would be on the cusp of voting for independence on a modern platform though

View

tubercolossus wrote: »

I think the point was not that there was 'genius' in a religious affiliation, but rather discrimination in its favour, and against the other denomination.

That’s not what the individual said.

In addition, the official discrimination of the time applied also to all non-Anglicans - ie to Presbyterian, Quaker etc also - and the former were (and are) concentrated in the NE of Ireland which was the unquestionably the most industrialised area in Ireland at the time.

It certainly wasn’t the case though that had the population of Clare all decided to convert to bring Quaker that would have resulted in the sudden industrialisation of Clare. :-)

View

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Today's republic wouldn't exist but for those "bonkers" ideas a century ago.

Precisely. That’s my point. Bonkers ideas can and do influence populations and fundamentally alter their histories.

BonnieSituation

View wrote: »

That’s not what the individual said.

In addition, the official discrimination of the time applied also to all non-Anglicans - ie to Presbyterian, Quaker etc also - and the former was concentrated in the NE of Ireland which was the unquestionably the most industrialised area in Ireland at the time.

It certainly wasn’t the case though that had the population of Clare all decided to convert to bring Quaker that would have resulted in the sudden industrialisation of Clare. :-)

View wrote: »

Precisely. That’s my point. Bonkers ideas can and do influence populations and fundamentally alter their histories.

I think the point is being missed here. But we're way off topic. So we'll leave it there.

View

breezy1985 wrote: »

Like many young nations it took Ireland a long time to go from being a sweatshop to a functional progressive country but I think Irish independence was very much proven to be the right thing in the long run.

The population of today's republic would rightly not vote for a "isolationist agrarian platform" because we are no longer an agrarian society and it would be a huge step back so that comment is just stupid.
I would say much like the Scottish we would be on the cusp of voting for independence on a modern platform though

We didn’t wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves transformed from an agrarian society to a more industrial one. At the time, huge numbers here voted for that isolationist vision of Ireland. That shouldn’t be forgotten. Nor that that vision of Ireland held sway for decades afterwards.

yagan

View wrote: »

We didn’t wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves transformed from an agrarian society to a more industrial one. At the time, huge numbers here voted for that isolationist vision of Ireland. That shouldn’t be forgotten. Nor that that vision of Ireland held sway for decades afterwards.

A pragmatic view from now might say breaking away didn't make economic sense then, but a pragmatist then felt very different about being conscripted to die in a British uniform in the blood bath of the great war.

Ireland, apart from the very north east had been reduced in the 19th century to being a food basket for the British industrial cities, so pragmatically it made no economic difference to strike for independence when Britain would still be buying what food Ireland produced.

Connelly had called after An t-ÁR Mór the decades of decay so rightly it made more financial sense that what money that was made from what we exported to Britain actually stay here. Plus Britain could no longer conscript our youth for their war machine which plundered other small nations.

Many people in many parts of England could chime with Connelly's decades of decay and wonder what to do, but Brexit only left them more vulnerable to the manipulative ruling class vampires who asset stripped England the same way they'd once starved Ireland.

listermint

View wrote: »

We didn’t wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves transformed from an agrarian society to a more industrial one. At the time, huge numbers here voted for that isolationist vision of Ireland. That shouldn’t be forgotten. Nor that that vision of Ireland held sway for decades afterwards.

You're under the cover dream of irexit propagated off the back of a successful brexit that hasn't happened is pie in the sky nonsense.

On no plain will Ireland choose to cut itself off from the world. That is exactly what brexit does when it claims to do the complete opposite.

9.9 percent drop in GDP over the course of last year when brexit hadn't even completed yet goes to show was international investment thinks of this sort of strategy..

The current 68 percent drop in exports shows what customers think of this strategy.

The re-allignment of your customers moving supply chains around you and creating direct distribution entities where you used to act as a hub for product's shows what supply chains think of this strategy.


It's bonkers start to finish. And Irexit is an extension of that bonkers only given credence by absolutely sideways lunatics who can't fill a small conference room in a gloomy Dublin hotel.

Strazdas

View wrote: »

Precisely. That’s my point. Bonkers ideas can and do influence populations and fundamentally alter their histories.

It wasn't that bonkers though. Irish nationalists were simply divided over the 'type' of independence they would like to get from Britain. The majority were happy enough with the Home Rule idea but the 1916 guys were fixated on the idea of an independent republic.

It's debatable in the extreme whether the Irish public would ever row behind an Irexit, given that they actually like the EU and European people (this sets them apart completely from the hardline English Brexiteers).

Professor Moriarty

Poll results published by Sky News in February 2019 indicated that, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, 81% of the Irish people polled "would cut economic ties with the UK rather than with the EU".

A Eurobarometer poll conducted across the EU in March 2019 showed that if a referendum on EU membership were held tomorrow, 83% of people in Ireland would vote to remain. This is the second highest result in the EU, with only the Netherlands ranking higher.

Hurrache

Strazdas wrote: »

It's debatable in the extreme whether the Irish public would ever row behind an Irexit, given that they actually like the EU and European people (this sets them apart completely from the hardline English Brexiteers).

It's not even debatable, they won't.

Zubeneschamali

View wrote: »

My point was that a bonkers idea can find traction and a population can get swept up in it. History is frequently determined by bonkers ideas sweeping a population.

Well, yes, we know, this is a thread about one such bonkers idea.

But since the UK, right next door, are testing that idea to destruction in real time, in close up, on the news every night, it is extraordinarily unlikely that that particular bonkers idea will ever gain any traction anywhere else ever again.

Far more likely that the fractured bits of the once United Kingdom will one by one see sense, abandon the bonkers idea and realign with the EU.

Capt'n Midnight

RobMc59 wrote: »

After workers at the Airbus facility at Broughton voted to accept a shorter working week to safeguard jobs it was great to see the very impressive Beluga passing overhead today towards Chester,probably to pick up another set of wings.

Enzokk wrote: »

Can you expand what you are trying to point out here?

Hard to know.

Aircraft parts are ZERO tariff so it can't be that.

The Beluga's don't have to queue on a disused runway while sorting out the Kermits (Kent Permit) and a few sheets of paper work don't add much cost to an items that cost millions each, so not that either. Paperwork and vet certs for a packet of cheese would a lot cost more.

The reduction in output is related to airlines being grounded because of Covid not Brexit.



I suppose one point here is that UK hasn't yet done a trade deal with the US or even sorted out the Airbus trade dispute. As a result Scottish whisky has lost over £500m in lost US exports because the UK isn't following WTO rules.

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Poll results published by Sky News in February 2019 indicated that, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, 81% of the Irish people polled "would cut economic ties with the UK rather than with the EU".

A Eurobarometer poll conducted across the EU in March 2019 showed that if a referendum on EU membership were held tomorrow, 83% of people in Ireland would vote to remain. This is the second highest result in the EU, with only the Netherlands ranking higher.

Sinn Féin is a party whose name can be translated as Ourselves Alone they've had an isolationist policy and they've had an abstention policy in Westminster for over a century. They have actively campaigned against joining the EU and every EU treaty since. Despite this even they aren't asking for Irexit.


The Irish Freedom Party who are looking for Irexit got 0.3% of the first preference votes last time out.

Akrasia

View wrote: »

That is basically what Ireland decided to do approx a hundred+ years ago when we were gung-ho to leave the U.K. & the Empire and become an isolated agrarian society.

Unsurprisingly the parts of Ireland - ie the NE - that were more industrial/less agrarian were hostile to that idea.

Never underestimate the possibility of a bonkers idea gaining traction.

The history of British occupation in Ireland shows what absolute nonsense brexiteers believe when they think the EU is oppressive towards them. The British occupying forces were humiliating and brutalizing Irish people, while the landed gentry kept sucked all of the wealth from the land and left the people of Ireland with nothing

Akrasia

View wrote: »

No it is not.

My point was that a bonkers idea can find traction and a population can get swept up in it. History is frequently determined by bonkers ideas sweeping a population.

Like it or not, if any of our political parties today stood on the electoral platform of the parties of a hundred years ago, they would face electoral annihilation in today’s Republic and their platform would be openly ridiculed as being crazy. The population of today’s Republic would be no more likely to vote for such an isolationist agrarian platform than unionists were back then.

The context is that we were agrarian anyway, but we didn’t get to keep any of the fruits of our labour, we were feeding the UK and making British landowners rich while doing it. Of course a modern party advocating a return to agrarian economics would not succeed because the context has completely changed

RobMc59

breezy1985 wrote: »

The right decision for the bosses not the worker. You really are a proper Tory aren't you.

And I can't believe someone as opinionated and vocal as you on this thread has never heard of Irexit. I would be ashamed to come on here and comment if I knew that little about Brexit and the surrounding politics

Why would I come on the brexit thread and talk about Irexit ?I would think there's a thread for it somewhere on boards.

Akrasia

View wrote: »

We didn’t wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves transformed from an agrarian society to a more industrial one. At the time, huge numbers here voted for that isolationist vision of Ireland. That shouldn’t be forgotten. Nor that that vision of Ireland held sway for decades afterwards.

You have to look at the alternatives, Politics is about choosing between your preference between 2 or more possible futures. Ireland within the British empire had not prospered, and was unlikely to prosper given their attitude towards the colonies. It was a choice between a guaranteed position as a margnalized colony who would be forever bled for resources by the British, or our chance to build our own country and keep the fruits of our own labour

It took decades, the fact that we swapped London rule for Vatican rule for a large part of that didn't help, but we finally started to mature when we joined the EC in 1973 and for the first time, we weren't a tiny small powerless country trying to stand up to the British, we were an independent nation in an economic block where our voice was listened to, and we were valued, and development funding was pumped in to help us build the infrastructure we needed to move towards a modern post industrial economy while also respecting our past heritage as a rural agricultural society

We began our independence from the British when we found Allies in the EC and later the EU.

The British always resented their loss of power over their former colonies and never fully engaged in the cooperative nature of the EC. at least not in a consistent way. A lot of this is just old fashioned Hubris.

Akrasia

RobMc59 wrote: »

Why would I come on the brexit thread and talk about Irexit ?I would think there's a thread for it somewhere on boards.

There is, It's just one man shouting at a cloud

Apart from a few lunatics, most people recognise that a united Europe is in our interest. There are still plenty of people who were alive during the horrors of WW2

View

listermint wrote: »

You're under the cover dream of irexit propagated off the back of a successful brexit that hasn't happened is pie in the sky nonsense.

On no plain will Ireland choose to cut itself off from the world. That is exactly what brexit does when it claims to do the complete opposite.

9.9 percent drop in GDP over the course of last year when brexit hadn't even completed yet goes to show was international investment thinks of this sort of strategy..

The current 68 percent drop in exports shows what customers think of this strategy.

The re-allignment of your customers moving supply chains around you and creating direct distribution entities where you used to act as a hub for product's shows what supply chains think of this strategy.


It's bonkers start to finish. And Irexit is an extension of that bonkers only given credence by absolutely sideways lunatics who can't fill a small conference room in a gloomy Dublin hotel.

I have no “under the cover dream of irexit”.

Politically I am at the complete opposite end of spectrum in EU terms, being far closer to European Federalists than I am to supporters to Irexit. I would be far happier to see Ireland opt into Schengen in the morning than most if not all of the posters on this thread.

That though doesn’t alter the fact that unfortunately bonkers ideas take on a life of their own and their consequences can last decades after they fall from favour - just consider the case of Germany.

joeysoap

QT last night on BBC.. One panelist voted Brexit because he believes nobody should be without a bed for the night and he looked at the EU and saw 500m people who might take advantage of the UK.

At one stage he preferred Scotland remain in the Uk as together they were stronger ( than separate). When Fiona Bruce pointed out to him that the Uk Brexit was the opposite of this he came out with above.

A northern Irish entrepreneur ( his words) with business interests all over the world no less.

It’s gets bonkier and bonkier

GazzaL

Customs are proving to be a major barrier to trade in goods between the UK and Ireland. Who would've thought? :pac:

Lots of British exporters still haven't worked out how to continue exporting. They don't even understand basic incoterms. I just put my head in my hands when they come up with all manner of alternative wordings for the acronyms.

I know of one British company that has a subsidiary in Eastern Europe. They've worked out how to export to their subsidiary but not to Ireland, so if an Irish customer places an order, the goods are shipped to Eastern Europe and then to Ireland.

Prices are moving upwards, some as a result of the global shipping crisis, but now moreso as a result of Brexit and the associated paperwork.

The delays in customs are excruciating and only for the fact that economic activity is reduced because of lockdown which currently lessens the impact, the delays will be intolerable.

embraer170

Absolutely ridiculous statement in a BBC article about how exporters are impacted.

GazzaL

embraer170 wrote: »

Absolutely ridiculous statement in a BBC article about how exporters are impacted.

I've come across that attitude amongst British businesses as well that are blaming the EU for the customs paperwork. This is what the British people voted for, and they knew what they were voting for.

timetogo1

embraer170 wrote: »

Absolutely ridiculous statement in a BBC article about how exporters are impacted.

Why's it ridiculous? Seems legit to me.

Export from one country from the EU to another in the EU. No form filling, no hassle, package just gets delivered to its destination.

Export from a third country to a country in the EU. Fill in the forms and jump through the hoops in the language of the country that you're exporting to. I don't see why the recipient should be expected to provide forms / translators from your language to theirs.

(I know English is the sending language in this instance, but it's not like the UK government have been working on making friends with anybody in the EU for the last few years so nobodies going to be too bothered to accommodate them and the French / English usually seem particularly antagonistic.)

Edit: I put this edit in after embraer170s post (two posts down) as there's no point dragging the thread off on a tangent.
Underlining part of a sentence and then joining up with a part of another sentence changes the meaning of the original sentence. Paragraphs aren't a puzzle that you pull some bits out of and slot in elsewhere to get a different meaning.

The bit I read in the paragraph was

If you don't speak French you're stuffed (blah blah blah) fortunately he does, that has allowed him to carry on (blah blah blah).

Having the dual nationality has nothing to do with speaking French. I speak French too, it means filling in forms is slightly easier when they're in French. No conspiracy here.