Brexit: Now What? Part II

[McHrozni]

I've tried to find a link to a quote I heard on the radio yesterday but failed. It basically said that although May will give a vote on the plan for Brexit, it doesn't mean that this is the plan that will be used.

It really puts the democratic deficit argument in perspective, doesn't it?

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

I remember that. Was it proven it was due to her Bremain activity, or is that a conjecture?

McHrozni

Her killer didn't leave a manifesto to that extent and he had a long history of being a supporter of white supremacist organisations.

There's no way to determine whether he was motivated in full, part or at all by her campaigning for remain but he was also apparently researching other prominent "Remain" politicians like William Hague online.

According to accounts he said:

Thomas Mair uttered the words “Britain first” and “keep Britain independent”

But whether the second part is a reference to the Brexit referendum or the shoutings of a madman isn't clear.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Yep you really don't know how the actual campaign was run. How simpler could it be than "You will be poorer?", "You will lose your job" and so on?

Every clear negative message was dismissed by the brexiteers as scaremongering. No matter what you do you cant counter 20 plus years of media brainwashing in a couple of months of campaigning.

Especially when your own party has been spinnning the same nonsense on things like iimmigration.

 

[McHrozni]

Her killer didn't leave a manifesto to that extent and he had a long history of being a supporter of white supremacist organisations.

There's no way to determine whether he was motivated in full, part or at all by her campaigning for remain but he was also apparently researching other prominent "Remain" politicians like William Hague online.

According to accounts he said:

But whether the second part is a reference to the Brexit referendum or the shoutings of a madman isn't clear.

So yeah, it's quite likely the killing was due to her Brexit positions. Thanks

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

Every clear negative message was dismissed by the brexiteers as scaremongering. No matter what you do you cant counter 20 plus years of media brainwashing in a couple of months of campaigning.

Especially when your own party has been spinnning the same nonsense on things like iimmigration.

Exactly, in essence Boris Johnson was campaigning against a caricature of the EU that he himself was key to creating back when he was covering EU affairs for the Torygraph.

For 4 years, anything that the EU did that was "good" from the perspective of the current government was claimed by that government whereas anything that was unpopular was blamed on the EU whether that was the case or not.

 

[McHrozni]

Exactly, in essence Boris Johnson was campaigning against a caricature of the EU that he himself was key to creating back when he was covering EU affairs for the Torygraph.

For 4 years, anything that the EU did that was "good" from the perspective of the current government was claimed by that government whereas anything that was unpopular was blamed on the EU whether that was the case or not.

Yes, that was quite a big issue too. Brexitards took a strategic approach, first weakening the popular opinion of EU through a campaign of lies and then ushering in the referendum.

There is no good way to address it. Campaigning on behalf of the EU 365 days a year is a tad much.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

Exactly, in essence Boris Johnson was campaigning against a caricature of the EU that he himself was key to creating back when he was covering EU affairs for the Torygraph.

For 4 years, anything that the EU did that was "good" from the perspective of the current government was claimed by that government whereas anything that was unpopular was blamed on the EU whether that was the case or not.

Yes, that was quite a big issue too. Brexitards took a strategic approach, first weakening the popular opinion of EU through a campaign of lies and then ushering in the referendum.

There is no good way to address it. Campaigning on behalf of the EU 365 days a year is a tad much.

McHrozni

Bit of a typo in my post

Should have read:

For 40 years, anything that the EU did that was "good" from the perspective of the current government was claimed by that government whereas anything that was unpopular was blamed on the EU whether that was the case or not.
​

 

[catsmate]

Like Trump?

Exactly.
The parallel between the unrepresentative nature of the UK election of 2015 and the US election of 2016 are striking.

 

[McHrozni]

Bit of a typo in my post

Should have read:

For 40 years, anything that the EU did that was "good" from the perspective of the current government was claimed by that government whereas anything that was unpopular was blamed on the EU whether that was the case or not.
​

Yeh, figures

This is the problem with especially unscrupulous politicians taking advantage of EU for their own short-term gain. Granted, Brexitards got the government posts, but are left with a mess they can't set right themselves, which will damage the country for generations to come.

Can we agree that the deplorables should be told loudly and repeatedly that they're paying the price of Brexit every time their wages drop, subsidies are cut, jobs lost or benefits taken away for the foreseeable future? "Hey, you lost your job, became unemployable and will live in poverty for the rest of your life, but at least you're safe from those pesky Poles!" is bound to anger anyone.

Maybe Johnson, Farage et.al. will eventually get their due as a result. I vote for the traditional English penalty for treason: HD&Q.

McHrozni

 

[catsmate]

Leave campaigners have always had a CLEAR plan - to get back control of borders and lawmaking but to retain trade and services access at current levels, and to stop paying EU contributions.

That's not a plan. How were these supposed objectives to be achieved.

The problem is that while it may be a clear plan, the EU insists (and I believe them) that it's not a REALISTIC plan.

And the EU is correct.

Now vested interests that want us to remain are deliberately confusing 'clear plan' with 'what will be the outcome of the negotiations'.

Ah yes, the conspiratorial invocation of the "vested interests".

We cannot possibly know that in advance of the negotiations, so the vested interests are really just trying to place an insurmountable hurdle to prevent any progress. It's a pathetic tactic and I'm confident that it will fail.

No. Your pre-emptitive blaming of others for the problems of this act of economic suicide is pathetic though.

 

[catsmate]

We had an MP murdered during the campaign all because she dared to hold the idea that leaving the EU was a bad idea and not all immigrants are bad. She was killed by a right wing white male.

Something the Brexoit supporters are doing the damndest to ensure is forgotten.

 

[Darat]

Exactly, in essence Boris Johnson was campaigning against a caricature of the EU that he himself was key to creating back when he was covering EU affairs for the Torygraph.

For 4 years, anything that the EU did that was "good" from the perspective of the current government was claimed by that government whereas anything that was unpopular was blamed on the EU whether that was the case or not.

And was still lying about in the campaign, remember he said you couldn't buy single bananas! This was a lie that everyone who has ever shopped in a shop that sells bananas knew was a lie. But that didn't stop him using the lie and the lie being repeated and repeated!

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Yeh, figures

This is the problem with especially unscrupulous politicians taking advantage of EU for their own short-term gain. Granted, Brexitards got the government posts, but are left with a mess they can't set right themselves, which will damage the country for generations to come.

Can we agree that the deplorables should be told loudly and repeatedly that they're paying the price of Brexit every time their wages drop, subsidies are cut, jobs lost or benefits taken away for the foreseeable future? "Hey, you lost your job, became unemployable and will live in poverty for the rest of your life, but at least you're safe from those pesky Poles!" is bound to anger anyone.

Maybe Johnson, Farage et.al. will eventually get their due as a result. I vote for the traditional English penalty for treason: HD&Q.

McHrozni

I think the only problem is that people won't be convinced until they see it with their own eyes and waiting for the economy to tank to prove that the economy will tank is not really ideal.

So the government need to be strong enough to do the right thing even if it is unpopular and explain why it's the right thing - which is exactly what they also need to be doing on things like immigration, refugees, etc.

 

[Darat]

Something the Brexoit supporters are doing the damndest to ensure is forgotten.

Did you see the disgraceful way the Daily Mail reported the trial, lost in the middle pages when every other national newspaper (except the FT) carried it on the front page. You'd almost think they had some qualms about what they helped bring about.

 

[3point14]

Leave campaigners have always had a CLEAR plan - to get back control of borders and lawmaking but to retain trade and services access at current levels, and to stop paying EU contributions.

That's not actually a plan. That's a list of goals.


The fact that, apparently, the leave supporters believe that stating a list of goals is equivalent to a plan isn't surprising.

 

[The Don]

I think the only problem is that people won't be convinced until they see it with their own eyes and waiting for the economy to tank to prove that the economy will tank is not really ideal.

Even if they do wait and even if it does tank it'll still be the EU's fault for not giving us everything we wanted from Brexit

So the government need to be strong enough to do the right thing even if it is unpopular and explain why it's the right thing - which is exactly what they also need to be doing on things like immigration, refugees, etc.

The thing is that in today's "I read it on the internet so now I'm an expert" society, politicians have to pander to the partially informed opinions of the electorate rather than their own judgement for fear of looking "out of touch" or "elitist".

A patrician society is damaging in many ways but at least it allows the "experts" to get on with their jobs with minimal interference from numpties like me. An unquestioning patrician society is undoubtedly a bad thing but I'm not sure that the right solution is for everyone's opinion, no matter how poorly informed or badly concluded, carries equal weight.

I see the same at the doctors'. Years and years of training and decades of experience are as nothing compared to the patient and fifteen minutes with a search engine

 

[catsmate]

Did you see the disgraceful way the Daily Mail reported the trial, lost in the middle pages when every other national newspaper (except the FT) carried it on the front page. You'd almost think they had some qualms about what they helped bring about.

Not specifically (I avoid any unnecessary contact with the Fail) but I noted it in general while in the UK; it's become a non-issue for some reason.

 

[McHrozni]

I think the only problem is that people won't be convinced until they see it with their own eyes and waiting for the economy to tank to prove that the economy will tank is not really ideal.

I think you're an optimist. They'll deny it has anything to do with Brexit, probably even blaming the EU for their misfortune.

So the government need to be strong enough to do the right thing even if it is unpopular and explain why it's the right thing - which is exactly what they also need to be doing on things like immigration, refugees, etc.

Yes, I agree with that. We just disagree with what the right thing is at times

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

Even if they do wait and even if it does tank it'll still be the EU's fault for not giving us everything we wanted from Brexit



The thing is that in today's "I read it on the internet so now I'm an expert" society, politicians have to pander to the partially informed opinions of the electorate rather than their own judgement for fear of looking "out of touch" or "elitist".

A patrician society is damaging in many ways but at least it allows the "experts" to get on with their jobs with minimal interference from numpties like me. An unquestioning patrician society is undoubtedly a bad thing but I'm not sure that the right solution is for everyone's opinion, no matter how poorly informed or badly concluded, carries equal weight.

I see the same at the doctors'. Years and years of training and decades of experience are as nothing compared to the patient and fifteen minutes with a search engine

Yeah. There is an imperfect solution for that: appoint an apolitical technocratic government every few election cycles, until the basic mess is settled. I'm sure a competent group of scientists and economists with no political careers to care about could set even Greece straight in one term, at least to the point where the state would have some credibility and a bargaining position to negotiate debt relief and whatnot. No one wants to send good money after the bad, but sending money to where you know it will be spent well is another matter entirely.

How to do that is another problem. Basically a party would have to run a platform on appointing a bunch of political outsiders who would end their political careers right after their greatest triumph, if all goes well.

It's a solution, but not very realistic. Certainly a party that would pull it off would secure a commanding share of voters for a generation or so, but it's a long and strategic game, and not many political parties are able to engage in such stratagems.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

Looks like Paris is starting to woo UK financial institutions:

Some major banks are in advanced stages of planning to shift some operations from London to Paris, France's leading financial regulator has told the BBC.

Benoit de Juvigny said that "large international banks" have undertaken the due diligence needed to set up a subsidiary in the French capital.

He also told Newsnight that "many other companies" had lodged informal inquiries about moving post-Brexit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38245646

Of course this could be exaggerated, made up entirely, could just be companies sniffing around "just in case" but it's (yet) another thing that the government need to take into account.