Brexit: Now What? Part II

[The Don]

Whatever happened to British manufacturing?

It was destroyed by successive Conservative governments.

It went out of fashion in the 80s.

That was certainly my point of view but although manufacturing has dropped as the proportion of GDP - and most certainly in percentage of the workforce, there is evidence that the value of manufacturing has grown in real terms since WWII - just that the rest of the economy has grown more quickly and the need for workers has dropped....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_Kingdom

A 2009 report from PricewaterhouseCoopers, citing data from the UK Office for National Statistics, stated that manufacturing output (gross value added at 2007 prices) has increased in 35 of the 50 years between 1958 and 2007, and output in 2007 was at record levels, approximately double that in 1958.

 

[Amazer]

Depends on what you mean by "good".

If you're in favour of a "Hard Brexit" then all the noises coming from Theresa May and her top team of Davis, Fox and Johnson will have been "good". She seems determined not to fudge the issue and give Brexiters what she says that she thinks they want - a hard Brexit.

To me that is just noise... nothing tangible (yet). They're politicians after all. They'll make whatever noise they think the electorate wants to hear.

That some top technology employers like Google aren't putting their expansion plans on hold and that manufacturers like Nissan are prepared to stay in the UK as long as they have assurances regarding costs and infrastructure is good news.

Maybe I'm just too cynical... but to me that just sounds like the additional cost of Brexit will have to be born by the public. Which means that it's not as bad as it could have been... but it's a stretch to call it good either.

 

[ceptimus]

You have to remember that although the Austria result was a defeat for the far right candidate it can hardly be called a victory for the establishment. All the liberal mainstream parties had already dropped out of the race so there was only a single anti-right-wing independent (former Green) candidate left.

It still looks like whenever voters are given a chance to vote against the status quo then they will. The Italian referendum was officially about constitutional change but ended up being, at least in part, a vote of no confidence in the Euro currency.

Plenty of elections due next year. It will be interesting to see if voters continue to reject the liberal mainstream when they get the chance.

 

[Darat]

You have to remember that although the Austria result was a defeat for the far right candidate it can hardly be called a victory for the establishment. All the liberal mainstream parties had already dropped out of the race so there was only a single anti-right-wing independent (former Green) candidate left.

It still looks like whenever voters are given a chance to vote against the status quo then they will. The Italian referendum was officially about constitutional change but ended up being, at least in part, a vote of no confidence in the Euro currency.

Plenty of elections due next year. It will be interesting to see if voters continue to reject the liberal mainstream when they get the chance.

Apart from when they don't like in Austria and Italy you mean?

 

[McHrozni]

Apart from when they don't like in Austria and Italy you mean?

The vote in Italy was, for all intents and purposes, a vote to preserve the status quo. It was about a constitutional change that would hopefully improve the notoriously unstable Italian politics and streamline the governance of the state.
It was clearly a threat to the establishment, which retaliated and plunged the state into another minor political crisis. Italy rarely goes through a year without one, so this was entirely in line with status quo.

McHrozni

 

[ceptimus]

Apart from when they don't like in Austria and Italy you mean?

Did you miss reading part of the post you replied to? My whole point, which I think I made clearly, was that although the Austrian voters rejected the more extreme of the two remaining candidates, that was only because the mainstream candidates had all dropped out of the race so that there remained a single, former green, anti-right, independent candidate.

So it's a good thing that that the far right winger didn't win but the candidate that DID win would also have be considered anti-establishment until quite recently.

 

[Craig B]

You have to remember that although the Austria result was a defeat for the far right candidate it can hardly be called a victory for the establishment. All the liberal mainstream parties had already dropped out of the race so there was only a single anti-right-wing independent (former Green) candidate left.

It still looks like whenever voters are given a chance to vote against the status quo then they will. The Italian referendum was officially about constitutional change but ended up being, at least in part, a vote of no confidence in the Euro currency.

Plenty of elections due next year. It will be interesting to see if voters continue to reject the liberal mainstream when they get the chance.

You mean that voters had no chance to vote for the rightist? I don't understand. It was the abstaining left wing parties they were unable to vote for. Unless you mean that as long as the left wing are foolish enough to allow their vote to be split in the face of right wing candidates, then the latter will win.

That may be true to some extent. You have heard how the failure of the Socialists, communists and liberals to make common cause against the Nazis finally in 1933 allowed them to usurp and abolish the constitutional state in Germany, already weakened by years of crisis and austerity. If the anti-fascists don't intend to be caught out like that again, I don't blame them.

But people who wanted to vote for the right in Austria were still perfectly at liberty to do so.

 

[ceptimus]

Yes the liberal mainstream candidates had to drop out because they knew that splitting the vote between them would probably result in the election of a far right wing president.

They did the right thing, in my opinion, but until recently they wouldn't have needed to use such extreme measures to keep out the far right.

The same thing looks likely to happen (or arguably is already happening) in the French presidential election race - and yet there is STILL a chance of the National Front candidate winning.

 

[Tolls]

I haven't looked well into the reforms that were proposed, but I have the impression that previously, the Italian executive needed the support of a majority in both chambers. Methinks stripping that out is a wise move, especially in a country that has had on average one government per year since 1946.

It might be a wise move, but the issue I suspect that voters opposed was the structure that was going to be put in place. It looked to me like it gave the President a lot of power. It may not sound like much, but being able to assign, what was it, 5 or 10% of the seats in the new house to your mates is a bit dodgy.

 

[McHrozni]

The same thing looks likely to happen (or arguably is already happening) in the French presidential election race - and yet there is STILL a chance of the National Front candidate winning.

True, but the French National Front of 2016 barely resembles the French National Front of 2006. It went from Holocaust denialism to seeking support from Jewish groups for example.

Their greatest threat right now comes from serving as Condottieri for the Kremlin, supporting Russian adventures in Ukraine in exchange for 'loans' for their activities. A political sellout like this in power in France, coupled with a disorganized if not outright UK due to Brexit plus Trump in US could convince Russia the Baltic states are ripe for the taking, which is when all hell could break loose.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

True, but the French National Front of 2016 barely resembles the French National Front of 2006. It went from Holocaust denialism to seeking support from Jewish groups for example.

That's not a sign of greater benevolence on the part of French fascists. There has been a change of scapegoating victim among the right wing in Europe and the USA; the favoured object is now Muslim and not Jewish. Obviously the extreme Zionism with which the Right currently identifies Jews is highly attractive to that school of thought, and of course these Zionists are cherished by the Right. If you're a fascist, what's not to like about settlements on the West Bank, the expulsion of the population of Golan, and so on? The FN in France, and UKIP and the EDL in the U.K., have swung into line with this change of tack.

Some of the more aged, and less mentally flexible, fascists are unable to make the change, and are still sailing the old course. Their programming is hard wired.

These include in the USA the KKK, and in France no less than Marine Le Pen's own venerable father, who has even been excluded from the FN in punishment for this untoward archaism.

 

[McHrozni]

That's not a sign of greater benevolence on the part of French fascists.

No, of course not. But it's a sign they are able and willing to alter positions if and when it suits them. If they see that preservation of EU and Euro is necessary in order for them to keep their heads (figuratively speaking), they will do their utmost (which might not be much, but still) to do so. They'll maintain popularity by coming down on Muslims, but essentially ignore other questions, because they can offer no answers to them. That's not good policy, but it sure as hell better than actively destroying the country even more than they already will.

The greatest immediate danger from FN comes from their willful service to the Kremlin, in exchange for campaign funds. They would ditch alliance with USA (including NATO) in favor of one with Russia, Marie LePen explicitly said so. Their European proposals are no better, and include basically dismantling the EU into some sort of a loose free trade area. It would be quite disastrous if that were to happen, both due to creeping Russian influence and the economic calamity this would cause. Luckily enough, their proposals are completely unworkable and would ruin French economy even more. Chances are that if they get in power, they will not be able to deliver and their popularity will wane.
It's not a scenario I'd like to test though.

A note for French politicians, you need to communicate this to the deplorables who vote for them. Political cartoons with Putin sodomizing Marie LePen in exchange for money are a good start. Campaign slogans to the tune "DO YOU WANT TO BE POOR? VOTE FN!" should work well too. In reality all sane French parties should chip in during the campaign in order to discredit them.

McHrozni

 

[Aepervius]

" They would ditch alliance with USA (including NATO) in favor of one with Russia, Marie LePen explicitly said so."

Yeah well from a few people I suspect are voting from the FN, I could hear they would rather be friend with the US than with the red.

So I don't think that tactic will go far.

 

[Craig B]

A note for French politicians, you need to communicate this to the deplorables who vote for them. Political cartoons with Putin sodomizing Marie LePen in exchange for money are a good start. Campaign slogans to the tune "DO YOU WANT TO BE POOR? VOTE FN!" should work well too. In reality all sane French parties should chip in during the campaign in order to discredit them.

McHrozni

I think you mean defeat them. The first cartoon you propose would discredit only its authors. I fervently agree that defeating fascism - in France and elsewhere - is absolutely necessary, but I am equally convinced that such measures as you describe will not be suited to this task.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Getting a bit off topic here

 

[Wildy]

You have to remember that although the Austria result was a defeat for the far right candidate it can hardly be called a victory for the establishment. All the liberal mainstream parties had already dropped out of the race so there was only a single anti-right-wing independent (former Green) candidate left.

They didn't drop out. The Austrian presidential elections use a two-round system where if a majority isn't reached in the first round a second round of elections are held between the two candidates who got the highest number of votes.

It still looks like whenever voters are given a chance to vote against the status quo then they will. The Italian referendum was officially about constitutional change but ended up being, at least in part, a vote of no confidence in the Euro currency.

I have trouble believing the highlighted part. The referendum would have granted more power to a single individual to the detriment of the other organs of government. Perhaps the suggested changes would have been beneficial to Italy but given their history I can certainly understand why the general populace would be averse to such a change.

I do find the fact that you can claim that this vote was somehow "against the status quo" to be interesting. Care to elaborate?

 

[ceptimus]

I do find the fact that you can claim that this vote was somehow "against the status quo" to be interesting. Care to elaborate?

The main opposition in Italy who supported voting 'No' are headed by the Five Star Movement and the movement's leader, comedian Beppe Grillo. The Five Star Movement was originally just a satirical/comedic vehicle for protest votes but lately it is showing more signs of maturing into a more serious political party.

The Five Star Movement have campaigned for a referendum on Italy leaving the Euro. We're still a very long way from that, and polls show that if there were a referendum now, Italians would vote to keep the Euro anyway. But still just the threat on the horizon of something that might destabilize the Euro was enough to spook the markets for a while and send the Euro plummeting - though it has now recovered somewhat.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ndum-party-matteo-renzi-resigns-a7456106.html

 

[Aepervius]

The main opposition in Italy who supported voting 'No' are headed by the Five Star Movement and the movement's leader, comedian Beppe Grillo. The Five Star Movement was originally just a satirical/comedic vehicle for protest votes but lately it is showing more signs of maturing into a more serious political party.

The Five Star Movement have campaigned for a referendum on Italy leaving the Euro. We're still a very long way from that, and polls show that if there were a referendum now, Italians would vote to keep the Euro anyway. But still just the threat on the horizon of something that might destabilize the Euro was enough to spook the markets for a while and send the Euro plummeting - though it has now recovered somewhat.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ndum-party-matteo-renzi-resigns-a7456106.html

It isn't that simple. Just like in many country, your vote for the local politician is not the same as your vote for the parliament is not the same as your referendum vote for the constitution or your vote against/or the euro. The only 2 italian I know this side of the frontier were quite explicit, that this was not a vote "against" the euro, but more like a mistrust vote against somebody wanting to get more power. Now they could be not representative of Italian in general, after all they have lived in germany for the last 25 years. But remember they got in the last decade of having berlusconi be corrupt as hell, and had a good idea of what worst it could be if somebody got more power, independentely of any party affiliation. I think the media and you are reading far more into that vote than they should.

 

[McHrozni]

I think you mean defeat them. The first cartoon you propose would discredit only its authors. I fervently agree that defeating fascism - in France and elsewhere - is absolutely necessary, but I am equally convinced that such measures as you describe will not be suited to this task.

I don't see why, Marie LePen acting as a prostitute for Putin is a fair and honest description of their party. Her National Front advocates quitting NATO and entering into an alliance with Russia ever since they received that $40 million 'loan' from the First Czech Russian national bank. Describing it as prostitution is really spot on.

Attacking them in this way might be in bad taste, but the deplorables who vote for them can only be reached in this way. This was one of the mistakes Bremainers made (among others): they thought that rationality, reason and good solid arguments will prevail. They were wrong, and we need to learn from their mistakes. Repeating them will probably only lead to the same result all over again. We don't want that, do we?

On the upside, Fillon leads polls against Marie LePen 2:1, and is the most likely future president of France. He's described as an anglophile, which will undoubtedly cheer the Brexitards, since they expect help from him. I hope he's French first and anglophile second. He also advocates dialogue with Russia and is said to be cozy with Assad, which is always dangerous, but better this than the FN.

He has learned one thing though, his positions on Islam are what the mainstream position should be for the past 15 years. Want to deal with the populists? Do that, and take away their single largest recruitment tool for good.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Yeah well from a few people I suspect are voting from the FN, I could hear they would rather be friend with the US than with the red.

So I don't think that tactic will go far.

It doesn't need to go very far. All they need to do is hammer the popular aspects of their agenda in order to win the presidency. Then they can begin with phase two, which they will claim is implicit in their endorsement.

It can't happen? That's precisely what happened with Brexit when Brexitards advocated a Norway style deal during the campaign and now they claim a vote for Brexit automatically means an endorsement for a hard Brexit. Do you think FN is more honest than the Brexitards were? Why?

McHrozni