Brexit: Now What? Part II

[McHrozni]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38224169

This latest U-turn was apparently inspired not by any sudden insight about a plan for Brexit but because a number of Tory MPs were threatening to back Labour in a Opposition Day debate that Labour has chosen to commit to the matter at hand on Wednesday.

Only six months after the latest reasonable date to do so. Brexitards are getting their feces together. If they could only engage in a debate what UK wants from Brexit, they could slowly edge into being considered reasonable people!

The plan is still well short of anything reasonable or democratic, because it doesn't actually give the Parliament anything. It just commits the government to publishing a plan in exchange for unquestioned parliamentary support. In Russia they would call it a victory for democracy, but west of that we're a bit more picky. This is nothing but the latest attempt by the Brexitards to force their will upon the British people.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

I found this interesting:

In other news, you might be pleased to hear that "Brexit means Brexit" appears to have been retired. In its place from the prime minister's lips today: "Red, white and blue Brexit" No idea? No, me neither. Answers on a postcard.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38227676

Maybe she's a vampire that will bleed the British people dry until their skin turns white and lips blue?

McHrozni

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Clever. You could have simply said that in their social practice citizens of a democracy must accept such equality as the basis of their conduct towards others, which is the factual situation. It is the one that I would apply to fascists, religious believers and all other citizens.
But you have cunningly produced a form of verbiage that includes the "provenance" of a "doctrine", such that a doctrine of said provenance may be treated as destructive of democracy. By which you presumably mean that citizens must not expound it, regardless of their behaviour in practice.
So we have to ban not misbehaviour, but acceptance of "doctrine". That's going back a bit. You've gone all mediaeval on us!
What doctrine do you have in mind, whose exponents have to be treated as destructive of democracy, and what sanction do you suggest be applied in their case?

I added in law to precisely distinguish between belief alone, and beliefs that seek implementation into law. This is a real distinction with a factual track record one might examine. I'll leave you to your homework.

More generally, I do believe that a loss in democratic conviction, an unwillingness to treat the other as equal, is exactly what much of the trend toward undemocratic behaviors by nominally democratic states relies on. What has eroded in the UK, as in the US, is the ability to see the other as a legitimate other, and so the relapse to tribalism. What is choke-worthy is that such discourse wraps its ugliness in the flag of "more democracy." Please.

As for clever, I do seem to be in tune with the general idea that, gosh, formal doctrines do matter, they do legitimize behaviors (uptick in racist incidents after Brexit/Trump), and people do actually sometimes act on the basis of what they espouse and hold dearest. Radical, I know.

 

[Castro]

You know what? I agree with you. Appeasing fascists never works.

The thing is, you're guilty of precisely that: appeasing fascists. Islam at it's core is a deeply xenophobic, supremacist, totalitarian ideology. Calling it fascist is being really mild. Yet somehow Germany is allowed to ban Swastika armbands but is appeasing fascists when it tries to partially ban the burqa.

The problem is that some people are simply unwilling to see some ideologies as they are. The fact they worship an invisible wizard in the sky and that their culture hasn't come to dominate the globe makes them immune to all meaningful criticism. These same people then criticize people who dare (the nerve!) to speak out against this fascist ideology as xenophobes. The fact their approach got us Charlie Hebdo, Batacalan, Marseille, Brexit, AfD, FN and Trump doesn't seem to bother them at all. Their way is right and they will fight tooth and nail to suppress dissenting opinion - in the name of fighting fascism, no less

McHrozni

Marseille?...do you mean Nice?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You know what? I agree with you. Appeasing fascists never works.

The thing is, you're guilty of precisely that: appeasing fascists. Islam at it's core is a deeply xenophobic, supremacist, totalitarian ideology. Calling it fascist is being really mild. Yet somehow Germany is allowed to ban Swastika armbands but is appeasing fascists when it tries to partially ban the burqa.

The problem is that some people are simply unwilling to see some ideologies as they are. The fact they worship an invisible wizard in the sky and that their culture hasn't come to dominate the globe makes them immune to all meaningful criticism. These same people then criticize people who dare (the nerve!) to speak out against this fascist ideology as xenophobes. The fact their approach got us Charlie Hebdo, Batacalan, Marseille, Brexit, AfD, FN and Trump doesn't seem to bother them at all. Their way is right and they will fight tooth and nail to suppress dissenting opinion - in the name of fighting fascism, no less

McHrozni

Yet again I disagree with everything you say. And you are putting words in my mouth and ascribing me with views I havent articulated. I haveno time for Islam or Islamism.
I just dont use that as a stick to beat Muslims with.

The people responsible fir brexit trump and fn are the tossers who voted for it inspired by views such as your own on muslims. Lets not throw logic out the window and suggest otherwise.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I found this interesting:

In other news, you might be pleased to hear that "Brexit means Brexit" appears to have been retired. In its place from the prime minister's lips today: "Red, white and blue Brexit" No idea? No, me neither. Answers on a postcard.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38227676

Maybe she's a vampire that will bleed the British people dry until their skin turns white and lips blue?

McHrozni

Its mere pandering to small minded little englander mentality. Nothing more. It might be turd but if the turd is wrapped in a flag and presented by a white christian face they will lap it up.

 

[McHrozni]

Marseille?...do you mean Nice?

Yeah, Nice my bad.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Yet again I disagree with everything you say. And you are putting words in my mouth and ascribing me with views I havent articulated. I haveno time for Islam or Islamism.
I just dont use that as a stick to beat Muslims with.

You have no time for Islam or Islamism, but you have plenty of time to ascribe me positions I never held, for the express purpose of using it as a stick to beat me with.

You need to address your priorities man.

The people responsible fir brexit trump and fn are the tossers who voted for it inspired by views such as your own on muslims. Lets not throw logic out the window and suggest otherwise.

Let's not pretend that people expressing their will at the polls is anything but democracy, shall we?

The people responsible for Brexit, Trump and FN are the ones who allowed things to get out of hand to the point the will of a large portion of the electorate to sway into the danger zone. Islamists bear a large portion of the blame, and most of the rest is on those who advocate continue ignoring the Islamists despite this.

Long after that we can start talking about the politicians who use this sentiment to further their own personal agenda. The voters don't even register, most of those voting for Trump, Brexit, AfD, FN and others don't have the mental capacity to decide what's best for themselves, or else they wouldn't make this choice to begin with. However our political system gives their votes the exact same weight as it does to anyone else, so in that case it's up to the rest of society to ensure they don't vote for the clearly horrible option in droves, as they do nowadays. This is not exactly rocket science, US Electoral college was established with precisely this in mind (and failed at it when it was rendered into nothing more than a accounting method, possibly twice in 16 years now). With no such institutional break we must rely on the mechanisms you denounce in order to avert disaster(s). You better hope the burqa bans and the like are enough, or else we're in for a rough ride again.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Its mere pandering to small minded little englander mentality. Nothing more. It might be turd but if the turd is wrapped in a flag and presented by a white christian face they will lap it up.

Yeh. I prefer the vampire explanation, it says essentially the same but it's more graphic

McHrozni

 

[Castro]

Yet again I disagree with everything you say. And you are putting words in my mouth and ascribing me with views I havent articulated. I haveno time for Islam or Islamism.
I just dont use that as a stick to beat Muslims with.

The people responsible fir brexit trump and fn are the tossers who voted for it inspired by views such as your own on muslims. Lets not throw logic out the window and suggest otherwise.

From my POV, unemployment, growing inequalities and poverty, financial and political scandals and unfulfilled campaign promises opened the gate for FN. Focusing on muslims is an easy way to keep all that under the rug IMO.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You have no time for Islam or Islamism, but you have plenty of time to ascribe me positions I never held, for the express purpose of using it as a stick to beat me with.

You need to address your priorities man.

As I said no interest in a detailed debate on Muslims and Islam again. Suffice to say that if you want to stop Muslim refugees coming into Germany (as you do) then that doesn't hurt Islam or Islamists it hurts Muslims. Real people.

Let's not pretend that people expressing their will at the polls is anything but democracy, shall we?

The people responsible for Brexit, Trump and FN are the ones who allowed things to get out of hand to the point the will of a large portion of the electorate to sway into the danger zone. Islamists bear a large portion of the blame, and most of the rest is on those who advocate continue ignoring the Islamists despite this.

Long after that we can start talking about the politicians who use this sentiment to further their own personal agenda. The voters don't even register, most of those voting for Trump, Brexit, AfD, FN and others don't have the mental capacity to decide what's best for themselves, or else they wouldn't make this choice to begin with. However our political system gives their votes the exact same weight as it does to anyone else, so in that case it's up to the rest of society to ensure they don't vote for the clearly horrible option in droves, as they do nowadays. This is not exactly rocket science, US Electoral college was established with precisely this in mind (and failed at it when it was rendered into nothing more than a accounting method, possibly twice in 16 years now). With no such institutional break we must rely on the mechanisms you denounce in order to avert disaster(s). You better hope the burqa bans and the like are enough, or else we're in for a rough ride again.

McHrozni

Where did I say it wasn't democracy? What I said is that you can't seriously suggest that decades of ever-increasing Anti-Muslim propaganda by the media and talking heads expressing the kinds of hyperbole that you engage in here (and then back away from when called on as being just 'words') has played less of a role in this than some people objecting to racism and xenophobia masquerading as rational discussion on immigration.

This has been almost entirely a media manufactured campaign to find scapegoats exacerbated by right wing cuts and economic hardship globally.

 

[3point14]

The people responsible for Brexit, Trump and FN are the ones who allowed things to get out of hand to the point the will of a large portion of the electorate to sway into the danger zone. Islamists bear a large portion of the blame, and most of the rest is on those who advocate continue ignoring the Islamists despite this.

Are we absolving the uncritical press of any responsibility?

 

[Hlafordlaes]

From my POV, unemployment, growing inequalities and poverty, financial and political scandals and unfulfilled campaign promises opened the gate for FN. Focusing on muslims is an easy way to keep all that under the rug IMO.

There is truth to this. The problems we face are many. Islam is not the only factor, even if it figures prominently. I do think it has a causal relationship in the rise of demagogues. Where I diverge is in the prescriptions, but not the description, broadly speaking. I am no more interested in seeing the postulates of rabid white "Christian" nationalists prosper than I am in seeing the spread of the doctrinal antithesis of modernity and tolerance of diversity.

My question to you, returning to Brexit, is if the prevalence of the factors you cite tracks with the regions voting most for Leave. Is, say, northeast England poverty stricken, and were there many promises made to that region that went unmet? If we take the example of the US, it has already been shown that Trump voters earn, on average, more than Clinton's, belying the argument that a poor economy or disadvantage was the driving issue.

 

[Craig B]

You know what? I agree with you. Appeasing fascists never works.

The thing is, you're guilty of precisely that: appeasing fascists. Islam at it's core is a deeply xenophobic, supremacist, totalitarian ideology. Calling it fascist is being really mild. Yet somehow Germany is allowed to ban Swastika armbands but is appeasing fascists when it tries to partially ban the burqa. McHrozni

Burqa? What about Lederhosen? It is permitted to ban swastika armbands but people come over all wimpy when the Austrians ban dirndils.

Do you think Kippot should be banned? If you don't that means you approve illegal Zionist settlements in the West Bank. The UN condemns these settlements, but when we try to stop orthodox Jewish men in Europe from wearing these ridiculous side curls, and women these nonsensical wigs, everyone starts banging on with sophism about who gives a toss how people cut their hair it's a human right.

Now taking on the Mullahs is tough. It's dangerous. It has to be left to the cops and the army. But the ordinary people can do their bit like in the war and make no mistake this is war by challenging women wearing burkini on beaches and that's safe and it's fun and it's showing Johnnie Foreigner how much we love our country so now let's string up the lily-livered traitor-loving parliamentarians it's the only language they understand and let Farage sort the country out that's what the people voted for ETA Let's not pretend that people expressing their will at the polls is anything but democracy, shall we?

 

[uke2se]

You have no time for Islam or Islamism, but you have plenty of time to ascribe me positions I never held, for the express purpose of using it as a stick to beat me with.

You need to address your priorities man.



Let's not pretend that people expressing their will at the polls is anything but democracy, shall we?

The people responsible for Brexit, Trump and FN are the ones who allowed things to get out of hand to the point the will of a large portion of the electorate to sway into the danger zone. Islamists bear a large portion of the blame, and most of the rest is on those who advocate continue ignoring the Islamists despite this.
Long after that we can start talking about the politicians who use this sentiment to further their own personal agenda. The voters don't even register, most of those voting for Trump, Brexit, AfD, FN and others don't have the mental capacity to decide what's best for themselves, or else they wouldn't make this choice to begin with. However our political system gives their votes the exact same weight as it does to anyone else, so in that case it's up to the rest of society to ensure they don't vote for the clearly horrible option in droves, as they do nowadays. This is not exactly rocket science, US Electoral college was established with precisely this in mind (and failed at it when it was rendered into nothing more than a accounting method, possibly twice in 16 years now). With no such institutional break we must rely on the mechanisms you denounce in order to avert disaster(s). You better hope the burqa bans and the like are enough, or else we're in for a rough ride again.

McHrozni

I read the hilited as you blaming everyone who don't vote for such populist cons as Brexit, Trump and FN for those same things. You may correct me if I'm wrong here.

If I read it right, I must disagree vehemently, and ask how you can make such a leap of logic. The people to blame must surely be the ones who vote for those things. Nobody is pushing them to do so. In fact, most of us are pushing them not to do so. If you are arguing that we must use reverse-psychology because these people are small-minded fools, I'd say you're being supremely arrogant.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Are we absolving the uncritical press of any responsibility?

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't. The news is run as a for-profit business, and rarely as a public service unbeholden to the government in power. Perhaps that has no good solution. Yet here I am, channel surfing among a wide variety of news channels, and I get the same stories repeated over and over, dominated by the highly salable human interest stories and sensational graphic reports. Perhaps more than a few monopolies need busting, local media markets made more competitive, and who knows, maybe a nice internet blackout for a year or two is what we need to get people to read actual journalism and documented research.

 

[McHrozni]

As I said no interest in a detailed debate on Muslims and Islam again. Suffice to say that if you want to stop Muslim refugees coming into Germany (as you do) then that doesn't hurt Islam or Islamists it hurts Muslims. Real people.

Letting them come to Germany en masse as we've seen a year ago worsens their prospects in the long term though. The first results are already visible in the proposed burqa ban. Let's not pretend this is anything but an attempt to control the very normal backlash that followed the migrant wave of the year past, plus the associated horror stories (Cologne groping incident, the pool incident in Austria, etc) that triggered the backlash. You might say the response is unwarranted and overblown, you might even be correct to some extent, but that gets us nowhere.

Muslim migrants and refugees should be treated in the same manner as economic migrants of any other denomination in Germany, and helped as much as any other refugee if they remain as refugees.

I accept their wish for a better life is real and very legitimate. They have no right to demand it however, and Germany should not have ethnic favorites either, except maybe those of German descent, i.e. from Kazakhstan. The main discrimination should be that of skill: would this migrant benefit Germany more than another migrant?

I fully expect Germany and others to help Muslim refugees as much as any other refugee.

Where did I say it wasn't democracy?

I said we shouldn't pretend this is anything but democracy in action. The bad part of democracy, sure, the part that needs to be controlled by checks and balances - but democracy nonetheless.

What I said is that you can't seriously suggest that decades of ever-increasing Anti-Muslim propaganda by the media and talking heads expressing the kinds of hyperbole that you engage in here (and then back away from when called on as being just 'words') has played less of a role in this than some people objecting to racism and xenophobia masquerading as rational discussion on immigration.

This has been almost entirely a media manufactured campaign to find scapegoats exacerbated by right wing cuts and economic hardship globally.

It was almost entirely manufactured, aside from the top six most bloody terrorist attacks in European history and the worst quasi-state in European neighborhood in 70 years you mean? Yeah. Almost entirely manufactured, aside from those little details.

Most media in my experience tried to dampen the effect of the flow by the way.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/08/us/muslims-in-america-shattering-misperception/
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...bc-gives-big-brother-a-twist-out-go-evictions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/islamethics/war.shtml

And so on and on. Most major media outlets are like that. The real myth is that there is an anti-Muslim propaganda spewed constantly by the media. The truth is diametrically opposite: most major outlets try their best to reduce anti-Islamic opinions whenever possible. Actually I was wrong calling it a myth. It is a bald-faced lie.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

I read the hilited as you blaming everyone who don't vote for such populist cons as Brexit, Trump and FN for those same things. You may correct me if I'm wrong here.

I blame it on their political opponents. Brexit is to a large extent a failure of those who campaigned for Bremain, Trump a failure of Hillary and DNC, FN a failure of the entire sane part of the French political spectrum. It's not a failure of their voters, but the actors who run opposite campaigns. They're the ones who need to get the message across, and they failed. In some cases this might've been unavoidable (FN?), in other cases it was a clear failure of getting the message across to the deplorables (Brexit), other times it was simply the mistakes done during the campaign (Hillary and her deplorables comment on tape for example, you can make such comments on a largely anonymous internet forum, but not when giving a speech FFS).

Voters are bit players. Yes it would be welcome if every sane voter would engage in the process to the best of their ability, but you can't just demand that of everyone.

If I read it right, I must disagree vehemently, and ask how you can make such a leap of logic. The people to blame must surely be the ones who vote for those things. Nobody is pushing them to do so. In fact, most of us are pushing them not to do so. If you are arguing that we must use reverse-psychology because these people are small-minded fools, I'd say you're being supremely arrogant.

Not to worry, you red it wrong

McHrozni

 

[Hlafordlaes]

... If I read it right, I must disagree vehemently, and ask how you can make such a leap of logic. The people to blame must surely be the ones who vote for those things. Nobody is pushing them to do so. In fact, most of us are pushing them not to do so. If you are arguing that we must use reverse-psychology because these people are small-minded fools, I'd say you're being supremely arrogant.

Tough topic, for sure. No one, indeed, actually forces anyone to vote in one sense or another. On the other hand, if evacuees from a nearby forest fire are walking through town recounting their experiences, and local politicians have nothing to say ~ regardless of whether the fires are a product of natural forces or human intent, or are likely or highly unlikely to recur ~ then the townsfolk can get the fair sense that there is a high degree of political nonchalance about what could, in theory and practice, prove harmful to the entire town. So, no matter one's views, factual analysis is called for, allowing the dangers to be identified or dismissed, solutions - or inaction - justified, and in general for policy to be guided by factual assessment. That, I think, is a fair expectation of political leadership. So far, only the far Right is filling that vacuum, albeit with their own silly "truths," with the unfortunate consequences for all to see.

 

[McHrozni]

Burqa? What about Lederhosen? It is permitted to ban swastika armbands but people come over all wimpy when the Austrians ban dirndils.

Do you think Kippot should be banned?

Personally I don't think any particular article of clothing should be banned. The burqa ban is probably necessary not because it bans the burqa, but because it will shift some of the deplorable vote from AfD to sane parties in Germany.
It's a little more complex than you can probably comprehend

Now taking on the Mullahs is tough. It's dangerous. It has to be left to the cops and the army.

In most cases these problems are settled by diplomats and negotiators. It's funny that with Muslims you need the cops and the army, but you don't think they're any different than the rest of us.

Let's not pretend that people expressing their will at the polls is anything but democracy, shall we?

Of course it is. The dark part of democracy that needs to be controlled by institutions and those with saner views, remember? Say the whole thing in context, don't crop out the critical parts like that, OK?

McHrozni