countthree
Well-Known Member
What does Morrissey think about it?
Brexit
- Thread starter countthree
- Start date
A
Anonymous
Guest
he doesn't give a f***, why should he? He's rich enough not to
A
Anonymous
Guest
He's probably a leaver, sadly. "The French will never like the English - that tunnel will collapse." "I nearly voted for Ukip. I like Nigel Farage a great deal." "The gates of England are flooded. The country's been thrown away."
On the other hand, he's normally confused and self-contradictory on anything to do with politics, so maybe he's a remainer.
On the other hand, he's normally confused and self-contradictory on anything to do with politics, so maybe he's a remainer.
countthree
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the answers. It seems a quite important issue.
Anyway, nothing good is produced when you are together by dispair, not by love. I'd like to know if people were consulted before joining the EU, because THAT was the big step. Oh these modern (fake) democracies...
Anyway, nothing good is produced when you are together by dispair, not by love. I'd like to know if people were consulted before joining the EU, because THAT was the big step. Oh these modern (fake) democracies...
A
Anonymous
Guest
Well, I'm still waiting to be consulted on the incorporation of Elmet into the Kingdom of Northumbria.
To give you a serious answer, though, there was a prior referendum in 1975, although the argument goes that Europe has changed a lot since then, which is why we are having another one.
I'm not sure what you mean about being "together by despair". Seems a bit of an odd concept. Joining the EU might have been a good decision or a bad decision for the UK, depending on your point-of-view, but it never had much to do with despair.
countthree
Well-Known Member
You are right. UK, France, Italy, Greece, Poland, Germany, etc., are joined by love or affectio societatis. Let's forget the two big wars during 20th century. They never happened.
Can EU assure to the rest of the world that a new European conflict is impossible because Germans are obtaining what they believe they deserve from the rest of Europe? Will it last forever?
It seems the terms of the inclusion have changed a lot since 1975. From a common market to a super state with regulations over a lot of aspects of everyday life. Anyway, I was curious about Morrissey, because he always has a good opinion about all kind of things. But this seems to be a complicated decision.
Kewpie, I'm sorry you disliked my comment. I didn't mean to offend you, I like British people.
A
Anonymous
Guest
You are right. UK, France, Italy, Greece, Poland, Germany, etc., are joined by love or affectio societatis. Let's forget the two big wars during 20th century. They never happened.
I'm not sure there are many examples of political/economic units coming into being without there first being a period of people kicking the shit out of each other. Seems like pretty much just the way we humans like to do things.
countthree
Well-Known Member
Sure, that shit reached four cardinal points of the globe.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Well, I guess by the time the 20th century came around we were pretty good at having wars. We'd had lots of practice by then.
But it's really not clear what your point is. Are you saying that it's no good trying to unite with people you've previously been fighting? What would be your alternative model?
There's a lot of arguments against the EU, with varying validity, but this is probably the weirdest I've come across.
countthree
Well-Known Member
I admit sometimes I'm not easy to read. Maybe it's the twisted way I use to make questions. My fault.
The said practice you tell us about is what makes some people nervous. I'm not against EU (who am I to have an opinion about it? less than a microbe), but even from the outside it's easy to see that into that delicate equilibrium of power there are winners and losers. How much time will losers be able to remain there? Are state members flexible enough to give up something and save the community? Peace is the priority, but is EU strong enough to maintain the peace achieved 70 years ago? will they continue fighting their battles in other parts of the world? Where? When is better to quit?
malvachat
My eyes are now open
Well I'm old enough to remember.
The Tories took Britain in without a vote in 1973.
Not even a manifesto pledge.
Labour had a referendum to stay in or get out under Labour in 1975.
The in vote won by a good maj of those that voted.
The biggest give of power which started the EU political integration rather than the Common market as it was known,was the maastricht treaty signed by Tories in 1992.
The government got some opt outs the biggest being the non inclusion of joining the Euro currency.
Followed by the Amsterdam treaty in 1997(New Labour)and the Nice Treaty in 2001(New Labour)
Then the Lisbon Treaty in 2007 again New Labour.
It's important to remember the result of this latest Referendum is NOT legally binding.
But I can't see any Government not even the Tories going against an out vote.
I myself are still undecided.
The fear campaign ran by the Tories cuts no ice with me.
Getting democratic control appeals to me.
My political hero Tony Benn(god rest him)Always warned against the political union of Europe for years.
But and it's a big but.
I'm nearly 60 so it's the future generations is who it's going to effect more.
I've no doubt the economy will take a hit.
But no more that the crisis caused by the greedy bastards in society in 2008.
Not sure I should be deciding for the young.
But I have a vote and will use it.
The Tories took Britain in without a vote in 1973.
Not even a manifesto pledge.
Labour had a referendum to stay in or get out under Labour in 1975.
The in vote won by a good maj of those that voted.
The biggest give of power which started the EU political integration rather than the Common market as it was known,was the maastricht treaty signed by Tories in 1992.
The government got some opt outs the biggest being the non inclusion of joining the Euro currency.
Followed by the Amsterdam treaty in 1997(New Labour)and the Nice Treaty in 2001(New Labour)
Then the Lisbon Treaty in 2007 again New Labour.
It's important to remember the result of this latest Referendum is NOT legally binding.
But I can't see any Government not even the Tories going against an out vote.
I myself are still undecided.
The fear campaign ran by the Tories cuts no ice with me.
Getting democratic control appeals to me.
My political hero Tony Benn(god rest him)Always warned against the political union of Europe for years.
But and it's a big but.
I'm nearly 60 so it's the future generations is who it's going to effect more.
I've no doubt the economy will take a hit.
But no more that the crisis caused by the greedy bastards in society in 2008.
Not sure I should be deciding for the young.
But I have a vote and will use it.
countthree
Well-Known Member
Thank you very much for the enlightment. Your explanation is very generous.
It seems the rest of the world would prefer GB remains in the EU. But from the people's point of view it's complicated, as you said.
Tony Bennet is absolutely right. Democracy is a big issue, but independence seems to be the major problem. It was very wise to keep the currency.
Is EU the better market partnership GB can achieve around the world? Is it ok to make an asociation with people who have to offer the same things than you? Will it eventually turn into an internal competition? The same question can be made about Italy, Spain, France, etc. But on the other hand, peace and stability have no price if EU actually guarantees them.
Of course you should be deciding with your vote. Not only for the young people, you have a third of your life ahead and a lot of things can happen in 30 years, so you are deciding for your own life.
Cornflakes
"A bit iffy" ★★☆☆☆ - AV Club
Hi Malvachat,
I'm also a Tony Benn fan and went to see him speak about five or six times after he retired as an MP. But no-one is right about everything, and I'll be voting remain.
Let me offer you my take on why the vote is not about democracy, and why you shouldn't use your vote as if it were.
Firstly, Tony was right that the EU does not offer a good model of democratic accountability, but wrong to imply that it is simply not democratic at all. The political power lies with MEPs (I'd agree it's a serious issue that most people know hardly anything about what they do, but we do at least elect them) and with the Council of Ministers, which has an electoral mandate from each of the member states. That the EU is just run by unelected bureaucrats is just a popular myth, really.
And compare to democracy here in the UK. The vast majority of our legislators (maybe not in terms of power, but in terms of raw numbers) are unelected. Plus, we have a voting system that means most people's preference (for Westminster elections) counts for nothing, and we can actually be ruled over, as is currently the case, by a Government that only a quarter of us indicated support for at the election.
Not that I'm denying the shortcomings of the EU, but it's not as if leaving would allow us to settle back into the warm bosom of a democratic utopia. And. it should also be remembered that, although things like fishing quotas and whether you can produce Wensleydale cheese in Croatia are not unimportant, the EU institutions don't have much say in day-to-day bread and butter things like personal liberty and public services.
But the most important thing to consider is what the practical effect of leaving would be. There are, realistically, two options, and neither of them look like they will give us much additional democracy.
Firstly, we could leave the EU but remain part of the European Economic Area (the "Norway Option"). This means we would still have to abide by most of the rules and regulations of the EU, but we would give up what democratic representation we currently have (because you can't have MEPs or a seat on the Council of Ministers if you are not in the EU).
Alternatively, we could leave the EU and EAA altogether. This would mean powers over some things would come back to Westminster. Perhaps most significantly, we could set a quota on immigration from the EU and we could have lower standards in terms of workers' rights. But the majority of what the EU does is to do with trade, and so, if we left, these things would not mostly be decided in Westminster, but by the WTO, which has not real democratic accountability at all.
And there really isn't a third option. Although leave campaigners are right to point out that the EU would still want to trade with us if we left, it makes no sense to suppose they would offer us better terms than the ones we get as a member. It's going to be Norway or nothing.
countthree
Well-Known Member
Like you say Cornflakes, democracy is a big issue but not the main concern of this particular agenda. The major issue is independence. Out of the supranational controls of EU and its Court of Justice, UK government will be unleashed for the good and the bad. Common people are very stressed by economy and inmigration, and they are right to feel so because they aren't being protected right now as they were before.
The independence plus the obvious lack of internal democracy (and its subsequent political and economical stability) are a heaven for some people. Just now, EU is not the best partnership from the powerful people's point of view. When it was a good deal they managed to get into it. EU means too much to answer for.
malvachat
My eyes are now open
I am aware of all the arguments for and against.
Something I don't shout about is that I have been a Labour party member for 43 years.
Up until three weeks ago I was out on the doorstep pushing the party message I understand it well.
But I have always believed that Labour should represent average normal working people.
Change things in government to help them.
Not do what some think they need but what they want.
(as best you can)
I could go though issue after issue the party despite saying they want to listen,when clearly they are not.
I am sick of Some Labour MP's thinking they know best.
It makes me sick to see some Labour MP's standing next to with Tories.
Especially with what they have been doing to poor and disabled people.
For years now the doorstep has been telling Labour about the need to do something about immigration.
Nothing practical has been proposed.
People are struggling and immigration has been causing all sorts of problems for normal everyday people.
I'm far from xenophobic in anyway form or matter.
But it's not for politicians to tell people they are wrong.
Labour is losing it's base support because it's not talking about the issues that people care about.
How the hell can Labour people vote UKIP???
I know why because people tell me.
I love Jeremy and so do lots on the doorstep.
He has energised the party and lots of committed people are joining and have joined.
But we've got to start fighting for policies that everyday folk want.
Stop allowing the bastard Tories to set the agenda all the time.
After the threats this morning from that prize idiot George Osborne.
That might be the last straw for me.
I hate being disloyal and I might yet change my mind.
I've gone from 70/30 in to about 20/80 out in the last three weeks.
I'll be meeting friends over the weekend and will no doubt hear all the same arguments again.
But as of now it's out.
Why?
Here's a good answer which I hear all the time.
"f*** 'em"
Something I don't shout about is that I have been a Labour party member for 43 years.
Up until three weeks ago I was out on the doorstep pushing the party message I understand it well.
But I have always believed that Labour should represent average normal working people.
Change things in government to help them.
Not do what some think they need but what they want.
(as best you can)
I could go though issue after issue the party despite saying they want to listen,when clearly they are not.
I am sick of Some Labour MP's thinking they know best.
It makes me sick to see some Labour MP's standing next to with Tories.
Especially with what they have been doing to poor and disabled people.
For years now the doorstep has been telling Labour about the need to do something about immigration.
Nothing practical has been proposed.
People are struggling and immigration has been causing all sorts of problems for normal everyday people.
I'm far from xenophobic in anyway form or matter.
But it's not for politicians to tell people they are wrong.
Labour is losing it's base support because it's not talking about the issues that people care about.
How the hell can Labour people vote UKIP???
I know why because people tell me.
I love Jeremy and so do lots on the doorstep.
He has energised the party and lots of committed people are joining and have joined.
But we've got to start fighting for policies that everyday folk want.
Stop allowing the bastard Tories to set the agenda all the time.
After the threats this morning from that prize idiot George Osborne.
That might be the last straw for me.
I hate being disloyal and I might yet change my mind.
I've gone from 70/30 in to about 20/80 out in the last three weeks.
I'll be meeting friends over the weekend and will no doubt hear all the same arguments again.
But as of now it's out.
Why?
Here's a good answer which I hear all the time.
"f*** 'em"
countthree
Well-Known Member
Cornflakes
"A bit iffy" ★★☆☆☆ - AV Club
I've got a sinking feeling this may be the decisive factor that wins it for Brexit. And I can sort of understand why. But hold onto the thought for just a second. Do you actually really honestly believe "f*** 'em" is a good reason for voting out? The consequences of out are obviously going to be massive. Surely it's just a question of judging whether they will be massively good or massively bad. I don't think there's going to be room on the ballot paper for sending a message.
I'd look at this slightly differently. I'm not going to try and claim that immigration never gives rise to any problems or difficulties. But I think that, nine times or more out of ten, we are talking about people's fears and misconceptions rather than people's actual problems. People believe that immigration puts immense strain on public services, generally, because it is what they are told rather than because it is what they observe. Immigration may change the character of an area, but my guess is that that doesn't apply so much with the doors you are knocking on. Just a hunch, because I've knocked doors myself and noticed that immigration comes up most in parts of town where there has been little or no visible immigration.
I don't think the problem is with politicians telling people they are wrong. That's actually a central part of a politician's job description, surely? What's the point of them if they are just going to tell people what they already think? Labour has a problem in this referendum with the legacy of 20 years or more of obsessing over the concept of the middle ground. On immigration, the on-message response of any properly trained Labour politician has been to say that (1) immigration is good for the country and (2) people's concerns about immigration are legitimate and we should listen to them.
So, Labour voters have had two decades of no antidote to the message of the Tories and the tabloids, because the difference in the Labour message has been only one of emphasis. At the same time, the view that public investment should keep pace with economic growth (and population growth) had, by the time of the last general election, been pushed out to the beardy left. So Labour's message was that immigration was something it was right to be scared of and, no, spending money was not an answer (the Blair-Brown era notion of additional spending for deprived communities having been scrapped by the coalition without protest from the opposition).
The problem for normal everyday people is the Tories, and that's what you should be telling them, IMO. Seems like you're the one being converted at the doorstep, which is not how it's meant to work...
I don't think you should be surprised by natural Labour supporters voting UKIP if they believe immigration is a serious threat to them. It's the only way of voting for less immigration. But Labour's problem isn't that it fails to pander. "You can't out-UKIP UKIP" is as true for Labour as it is for the Tories. And you can't, therefore, blame them if they're planning to vote out.
Last edited:
A
Anonymous
Guest
I'm not British I don't have any experience with the his issue other than reading it and a, not trying to make a point about this vote and am almost a bit excited to see people being so rational and express well thought out ideas but I wanted to comment about the nature of politicians and that I agree with this
"I don't think the problem is with politicians telling people they are wrong. That's actually a central part of a politician's job description, surely? What's the point of them if they are just going to tell people what they already think?"
As my country would still be one of racial segregation if they did. Also that voting to send a message is how the Republican Party and its base voters ended up with trump. It was a big contributing factor so sending that message can sometimes be shortsighted and you can formsure end up with something worse
"I don't think the problem is with politicians telling people they are wrong. That's actually a central part of a politician's job description, surely? What's the point of them if they are just going to tell people what they already think?"
As my country would still be one of racial segregation if they did. Also that voting to send a message is how the Republican Party and its base voters ended up with trump. It was a big contributing factor so sending that message can sometimes be shortsighted and you can formsure end up with something worse
